Home » Featured, Headline

Two Schools of Thoughts on Pat Hughes Backing Mark Kirk for Senate

Thomas F. Roeser and John Powers 29 April 2010 9 Comments

Tom Roeser Pat Hughes is—What?

Kirk Touche.

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) who sought passionately to get former Veep candidate Sarah Palin to endorse him when he had a primary opponent…and who was turned down…is now turning down the opportunity to be part of the Palin Illinois rally. O.k. Nothing wrong with that.

Hughes Wha?

Patrick Hughes who ran against Mark Kirk in the February 2 primary enthusiastically plumped for him the other day and now has been actively stumping for Kirk. See the difference?

This is what turns people against politics. Not that Hughes supports Kirk but that he didn’t ask any advice from his contributors and supporters…one of whom was me ($1,000)…before he jumped on the everybody support Kirk pig pile…hoping to eventually get Kirk support when as expected Hughes wants to run against Judy Biggert in 2012 (Kirk support him? A fantasy).

The usual route is that in a primary that bitter and personal as Hughes legitimately waged, the defeated candidate meets with his supporters and determines what to do next. Nine out of 10 probably would have told him to support Kirk…but not go up to the front of the church and pass the plate. But Hughes clearly wants to run for office again and so wants to make amends.

Again: nothing wrong with that—but when he gets a bit older and wiser he will shuck that 40-year-old hard chargin entrepreneur’s attitude of doing it all himself for himself…by himself…talking to no one but himself… and consult with those who thought enough of him to pitch in initially in what all of us knew would be a near hopeless race…for which we were plugging our dough down a rat-hole. We all knew it but thought the point of having an opponent to Kirk’s pro-abort pro-gay rights position was right then.

That was more important than Hughes’ precious ambition to go to Congress to satisfy his own ego needs.
There were issues involved, m’friend—not you’re self-promotion.

Let me tell you Hughes has a whole lot to learn about politics—and right now he has barely made it past kindergarten.
And if he thinks I’ll support him again, he has another think coming.

From John Powers

The Illinois Republicans, led by Pat Brady, held a fundraiser at the Drake last Thursday night featuring Michael Steele, the head of the RNC.  I attended, and was glad to be seated with the Plummer family, while Jason Plummer, the Lt. Gov candidate was away on military duty and Adam Andrzejewski, who was a candidate for governor.  The program was short and to the point, the Republicans can win in Illinois this fall.

Every speaker made it clear that we  may not agree with everything that a Republican does, and may be in opposition to a candidate during the primary, but after the preliminary is over, the party comes together behind its chosen candidate.

Pat Hughes was also in the audience, and made the effort to go from table to table to thank his primary supporters, myself included.  Now Pat has made it clear that he supports the party’s candidate, Mark Kirk.  This is how the Republicans can win elections.

I agree with my friend and colleague, Tom Roeser, the protocol (informing supporters 1st) could have been managed differently by Pat Hughes.  But I think this is substituting protocol for substance.  With his miserable policies and failed bank, no one, including Democrats, interested in the future of the State and the Country should seriously be supporting Alexi Giannoulias.  Any weakness shown in the general election campaign can be interpreted as supporting the Rezko candidate, Alexi Giannoulias.

Pat Hughes took the high road in the primary campaign, while others spread malicious rumours about Mark Kirk in a media campaign that smelled of Democratic Operatives.  Hell, Kirk’s supporters spent quite a bit of time and money attacking Pat Hughes for seeking and receiving the support of Mike Ditka.  Hughes is the only one who came out of the primary supporting consistent policies and principles and running a up-front campaign.

The Republican party needs another 100 candidates just like Pat Hughes.  Could he have handled this differently? Sure, but I would rather have Pat Hughes out there making small mistakes, than Alexi Giannoulias (or Dick Durbin for that matter) in a position where he can profoundly effecting the future of the county.   We can stand a few small mistakes.  We can’t stand another 6 years of incompetence in Washington DC.


  • Disappointed said:

    Anyone who thinks we can build a Republican Party around a closet case like Mark Kirk who thinks it’s okay to even kill a baby that’s in the process of being born fully developed and grasping its little hands to be given a chance, is certifiably nuts, at best.

    Hughes joins the ranks of the conservative sellouts this year. I’ll never trust him again. I feel stupid now defending him and voting for him in the primary.

  • John Powers said:

    Per the anti-Hughsians, sellouts must form a majority of the voters in Illinois.

    The Republican Party should campaign for the sellout vote if it wants to win this election.


  • Disappointed said:

    Your logic is circular. You’re assuming that it’s a “win” for Republicans to have Mark Kirk as a senator.

    For the reasons stated above and because Mark Kirk destroys the Republican brand from within, I think you are all wet.

    Those of us serious about rebuilding the Republican Party know that we need people with more than just an “R” by their name.

  • John Powers said:

    Well then you should have worked harder in the primary then shouldn’t you? I worked occasionally and fairly hard for Pat Hughes and was rowing alone quite a bit of the time. We lost, and now we’ve got Kirk, who is by no means perfect, but also would generally stand with the party.

    First and foremost the country is in grave danger because of the deranged Left wing politics of Pres. Obama and the Democratic Congress. They must be defeated first before we can find perfection in the Republican party.


  • Disappointed said:

    “….but also would generally stand with the party.”

    You assume facts not in evidence and in fact something that flies in the face of Kirk’s actual record. When it comes to America’s condition, Kirk’s hands are just as dirty as Obama’s. Kirk was voting for Denny’s budget busting agenda when Obama was still an unknown state senator.

    Also, you must have me confused with a lemming. I need not join the herd just because too many others didn’t do their job in the primary.

    I think we’re done here. If you think it’s a “win” for Republicans to put a pro-partial birth abortion guy at the head of our IL party, I don’t know what else to tell you.

  • John Powers said:

    Blaming others for a loss in the primary is the scourge of any political party. Go win it yourself. You didn’t win; Pat didn’t win; Kirk did.

    I am very tired of hearing “too many others didn’t do their job in the primary” from Republicans (especially Jim Edgar). Step right up and do your part. Quit complaining and blaming others for what you could do yourself.


  • Disappointed said:

    John, I hate to race to the bottom by playing this card, but your silly talking points make me feel okay about it.

    Under your logic, all Germans should have just shut up and supported Hitler because he won his election.

    No, I’m not comparing Kirk to Hitler. I’m showing the weakness of your argument.

  • John Powers said:

    Top 3 ways to for Republicans to lose elections

    1) Act just like Democrats
    2) Behave irresponsibly after primary loss (Edgar like, for example)
    3) Throw out dubious references to the National Socialist party, racial theories, animal husbandry etc.

    I’ll take you up Mr. Disappointed that #1 is a major problem with the Republican candidate, but by no means excuses #2 and #3.

    The Republicans can win the Illinois Governor’s race and the Senate seat this year if we can avoid the above 3 as much as possible.


  • Philip Krone said:

    With Republicans like John Powers and Pat Brady and now Pat Hughes, the Republicans have an excellent chance of winning the top offices and some of the lower ones too statewide. I predict by Labor Day the two Roesers (Jack and Tom will also be on board).

    Roger Keats will not defeat ToniPreckwinkle, but he will run the kind of credible campaign which will assist the Republican state ticket.

Leave your response!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.