Click here to view the embedded video.

I believe at 44 seconds in they have a black helicopter.

“If your Administration brings Al Qaeda terrorists to Illinois, our state and the Chicago Metropolitan Area will become ground zero for Jihadist terrorist plots, recruitment and radicalization…As home to America’s tallest building, we should not invite Al Qaeda to make Illinois its number one target…The United States spent more than $50 million to build the Guantanamo Bay detention facility to keep terrorists away from U.S. soil..Al Qaeda terrorists should stay where they cannot endanger American citizens.”

Kirk contradicts himself, as usual, having voted to allow Guantanamo prisoners to the mainland. Proving once again that Mark Kirk can be on both sides of everything.

That said, given the Congressman is apparently wetting his pants, he might want to avoid the Senate Floor given David Vitter’s proclivities.

Click here to view the embedded video.

BUTTARS: I meet with the gays here and there. They were in my house two weeks ago. I don’t mind gays. But I don’t want ‘em stuffing it down my throat all the time. Certainly not in my kid’s face.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Sen. Chris Buttars believes gays and lesbians are “the greatest threat to America going down,” comparing members of the LGBT community to radical Muslims.

Apparently he has an oral fixation.

Via Think Progress

Click here to view the embedded video.

And despite the media attempting to paint Palin as a social conservative wacko the main take from her values is that she has rock-solid integrity–she allied herself with Democrats to toss out corrupt members of her own party–and succeeded.

Reality?  Other than wingnuts, people think she’s a moron and incompetent.

But keep arguing that, it’s quite convenient for those who would love to see her as the Republican in 2012–Democrats.

He also has Alexi’s and Hoffman’s responses:

Alexi:

“Mark Kirk begging for Sarah Palin’s endorsement makes it clear that he’ll seek any endorsement, take up any political or policy position, and attempt any political maneuver that he thinks will get him more votes. At the very best, this is shameless political pandering. At worst, it’s further proof that Mark Kirk lacks the political courage to make the tough decisions to move this state forward.”

Hoffman:

“What does Mark Kirk really believe? Last year he correctly called the addition of Sarah Palin to the McCain ticket a mistake. This year, when faced with a conservative primary challenge he is seeking her endorsement. Kirk has again revealed his true colors: No principles, no standards, whatever it takes to win. Palin is out of touch with the values of the people of Illinois. Today, Mark Kirk reminds us all that he is too.”

Rich points out the message that is starting to hurt Kirk:

I think “What does Mark Kirk really believe?” is the real issue here. He’s been all over the map since he started this race, jumping from one core belief to another. The history of his position on Palin clearly demonstrates that he has had this problem for quite a while now.

We saw this last year in his “private” comments to Republicans when he didn’t think swing voters were listening, but those instances never gained much traction.  His larger problem is that women in the suburbs like him because he’s not polarizing, but to keep his base he has to be more polarizing.  Even before the message that he has no core beliefs has caught on in the general public, he’s slightly behind Alexi in a general election match-up.  Take away some of the suburban women he can usually count on and he’s down to typical Illinois Republican levels of support.

Add to that an almost certain challenge from the Constitution Party loons who are very tied into the Tea Party movement and he loses his right flank too.

Mark Kirk is finding out why there are so few Jim Thompsons left in Illinois.  The tent isn’t what it used to be.

In an interview of two of the 10th Congressional District candidates conducted by the Tribune editorial board, Kirk would not say whether he believed Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had the qualifications to become president.

“Quite frankly, I don’t know,” said Kirk, 49, of Highland Park, when asked if Palin could step into the job. In answer to repeated inquiries about Palin’s experience, Kirk said, “I would have picked someone different.”

Kirk was an early supporter of Arizona Sen. John McCain’s candidacy for the GOP presidential nomination. And late last month, as Republicans began gathering for their national nominating convention, Kirk said he was “encouraged” by McCain’s choice of Palin and credited conservative political parties around the world as the ones that break through “key barriers,” such as gender.

Today:

Illinois Rep. Mark Kirk penned a memo to Republican poobah Fred Malek hoping to secure an endorsement from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for his Senate candidacy, according to a copy of the memo obtained by the Fix.

After noting that Palin will be in Chicago later this month to appear on “Oprah”, Kirk writes that “the Chicago media will focus on one key issue: Does Gov[ernor] Palin oppose Congressman Mark Kirk’s bid to take the Obama Senate seat for the Republicans?”

Kirk goes on to write that he is hoping for something “quick and decisive” from Palin about the race, perhaps to the effect of: “Voters in Illinois have a key opportunity to take Barack Obama’s Senate seat. Congressman Kirk is the lead candidate to do that.”

Malek confirmed the authenticity of the memo in an e-mail exchange with the Fix.

As Rich points out, the Chicago media won’t have Mark Kirk on their mind, they’ll have Oprah on their mind.

Dan Hynes–more like this please:

@pwire While we’re on the topic – http://bit.ly/29IKTl – I will not seek, nor will I accept, Sarah Palin’s endorsement in 2010.

While silly and funny, it’s a great way to reinforce the message that Kirk is a complete and total pander bear.

“Illinois lawmakers already told Blagojevich ‘You’re fired,’ he doesn’t need to hear it again from Donald Trump,” the letter read.

“To Hollywood, Rod Blagojevich might be a harmless joke, but to Illinoisans he’s no laughing matter,” Syverson wrote. “Putting him on The Apprentice gives him a national megaphone to not only influence potential jurors, but to defend his horrible record as governor that contributed to the economic and budgetary collapse Illinois faces today.”

Syverson will file a senate resolution urging NBC and Donald Trump to kick Blago off the show.

“There’s a reason why the Illinois Senate voted unanimously to remove him from office,” Syverson said. “From day one, he embraced a pattern of corruption that not only involved the sale of state influence and contracts to the highest bidder, but his reckless fiscal policies have driven Illinois to the point of bankruptcy. That’s Rod Blagojevich’s real record.”

Illinois state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias (D) leads Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) by three points, 46-43, in an internal poll in their Senate race.

The Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research poll also shows former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman (D) trailing Kirk 48-39.

I’m sure more details will be out soon.

In one of the better bits of right wing insanity, co-founders of the Saint Louis Tea Party asylum are called out Todd Akin and Roy Blunt for not publicly backing Hoffman (before the withdrawal) or they are going to come after them.

Loesch and Hennessy, as you can see here, held signs that said, “GOP: Put up or shut up” at the rally.  In fact, Loesch said (24:35 in the below video), that she was giving Missouri Representatives Roy Blunt and Todd Akin “until the end of the day” to release a statement against Scozzafava or else, “we are coming for you.”  She also said earlier (19:00) that if they didn’t have the brass to do “what’s right,” then, “we will vote you out!  We will come at you with so much heat, you won’t even know how to handle it!”

Even if Hughes turns out to be a bust, the Constitution Party is likely to have a candidate to siphon votes away and the Constitution Party is a big part of the teabagger crowd.

Senior class president Fernando Cutz and the six black students who allege they were racially discriminated against by the Original Mothers bar in Chicago said at a news conference Wednesday that they will not be pressing charges against the establishment.

Cutz announced at the conference, held in the Danforth University Center, that the students have reached an agreement with the bar, and Mothers will issue a public apology to the students. Managers at the bar will undergo diversity sensitivity and awareness training. The students are receiving free legal counsel from Covington and Burling LLP in their negotiations with Mothers.

Mothers will also hold four charity fundraisers, three at the bar in Chicago and one in St. Louis. The students will determine the recipient of the funds. Senior Regis Murayi, one of the six black students rejected from the bar, said the funds will likely go toward a social justice-related cause.

“As this whole incident is about raising the issue about race relations in the United States, we think it’s very important to contribute to a fund or even a scholarship or organization, something to that matter, that would do the best to promote raising these types of issues,” Murayi said.

Before trying to tag Dan Hynes with not watching the budget closely enough, we might check the Illinois Constitution:

SECTION 17. COMPTROLLER – DUTIES The Comptroller, in accordance with law, shall maintain the State’s central fiscal accounts, and order payments into and out of the funds held by the Treasurer. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

SECTION 18. TREASURER – DUTIES The Treasurer, in accordance with law, shall be responsible for the safekeeping and investment of monies and securities deposited with him, and for their disbursement upon order of the Comptroller. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

Now, under Illinois law there are certain circumstances in which the Comptroller can avoid writing the checks.  Those are mostly related to non-performance for suppliers/contractors, there is no money, or cases where there is a dispute as to the conditions of disbursement.  Mostly though, the this is a shall do responsibility meaning it isn’t discretionary for the Comptroller to write checks when the legislature has appropriated funds.  As an executive branh Constitutional Officer the Comptroller is not allowed to make law or appropriate funds.  He may, in specific cases not issue funds, but he does not even have the power of rescission that the Governor has limited authority to use.   If Dan Hynes didn’t sign the checks across the board, he would be committing an impeachable offense.

In fact, as Zorn notes, when Hynes didn’t sign off on some disbursements the Govenor’s campaign attacked him. Given Hynes didn’t hold out  very long he was almost assuredly within his duties, but if he had refused to write checks for appropriated funds after a time, that would be impeachable. Quinn’s team, even though they won’t admit it, have just landed themselves squarely on both sides of this argument.

“It’s time to lower the cost of health coverage. it’s time to restore accountability to the system. and it’s time to make sure every American has access to quality, affordable health care. public option will spur new innovations that will help us get there. that’s why I will not back any insurance plan that does not carry with it this major, major issue of public option,” Burris said.

Regardless of whether or not he was appointed by scandal-tainted former Governor Rod Blagojevich and regardless of the fact that he’s not running for election to his seat from Illinois, Burris holds one of the 60 votes Democrats will need to pass a health reform bill.

It is becoming hard to imagine a bill that will garner the vote of all 60 Senators who caucus as Democrats. Burris won’t support a bill without a public option. Connecticut Independent Joe Lieberman link: won’t support a bill with a public option.

Apparently there is a giant all encompassing conspiracy to drive me stark raving mad.  I’m not thrilled with an opt-out, but hey, if Mississippi wants to continue to have third world health care stats, who am I to stop them.  However, getting a bill with a public option for those sane states is worthwhile.

Finally, the undersigned counsel appeals all aspects of this Court’s Order in Document #28, wherein the Court proved its pervasively extreme and outrageous (extrajudicial) prejudice and bias against the undersigned counsel by not only denying her Motion to Recuse (Document #24) but also her Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Court’s Order to show cause (Document #25, referencing Document #17).

Ordinarily, counsel admits that it would have been prudent if not required to seek relief from these sanctions by the filing of a motion under Rule 59 to preserve or perfect error in the trial court regarding the manifest errors of law and fact which the court made in its last entered order contained in Document #28.  However, the undersigned counsel submits to the United States Court of Appeals for the 11^th Circuit that this Court’s (Judge Clay D. Land’s) refusal to grant either of her last motions, while doubling its unreasonable assessment of sanctions against her from $10,000 to $20,000 rendered such a “normal” course of litigation conduct both futile and potentially self-destructive.  Judge Land’s actions that amounted to misstating or misrepresenting ninety percent of what was presented in the pleadings and argument, completely ignoring ninety percent of the argument and facts, making extremely rude and demeaning remarks, showing bias; taken together,  appear to be designed to silence her and, intimidate her and above all, punish her for what the Court perceived as political rather than “core” constitutional questions. It appears to be a thinly veiled threat to other attorneys not to pursue similar Constitutional issues, which will have a chilling effect on the ability of the public to use Federal Court system to uphold their constitutional rights.   Judge Land’s remarks amounted to nothing short of  political lynching, which turned into feast and celebration by the media mob.   Accordingly, the undersigned counsel submits that she reasonably feared that filing any further motions might lead to the imposition of further sanctions by this particular Judge and Court. Judge Land might well have increased the sanctions amount from $20K to $40K or even $100K, all without specifying any real violations of Rule 11, even if such further filings were merely to show the undersigned counsel’s status as an attorney working pro bono without compensation, or to point out how the U.S. District Court had misconstrued some of the key precedents it cited in this case, including but not limited to Mindes, 453 F.2d 197 (5^th Cir. 1971).

As far as I can tell, there is no actual response to Judge Land’s ruling other than to call him names.

I’m sure that will work well for her.