Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL), who is running for President Obama's former Senate seat in 2010, just pulled off an amazing trick at a Republican event over the weekend: He said that he voted for the climate bill in the House, but would vote against it in the Senate -- and got the crowd to switch from booing to cheering him.
"Let me say briefly about cap and trade. I voted for it because it was in the narrow interest of my Congressional district. But as your representative," Kirk said, then getting interrupted by booing. "As your representative, representing the entire state of Illinois, I would vote no on that bill coming up."
The amazing thing is how quickly the crowd switched from booing to cheering, even as Kirk flip-flopped right in front of them. This would explain Kirk's upcoming policy: "Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others."
Check it out at the 3:10 mark:

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

foodchain11
September 15, 2009 3:06 PM
He's not the man for the senate!! He has performed well for IL (I'm in his district) BUT he voted Bush all the way. Forget this Cap and Trade nonsense--he voted for all of Bush's very regrettable agenda
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
September 15, 2009 4:23 PM
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Philv
September 15, 2009 4:37 PM
So he voted for Cap and Trade, presumably because he was going to run for Senate in a very blue state and would have difficulty winning without that vote, and then turns around and throws that away in an unopposed primary to appease the base that is going to vote for him anyway? And we're supposed to be afraid of this guy winning in one of the bluest states in the country?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
markg8
September 15, 2009 5:38 PM
Part of Kirk's campaign schtick as a Navy reserve officer is he rightly says most service members in the Gulf don't want to be going back to the middle east every 20 years to fight, (never quite admitting the last part "for oil"). This of course doesn't square with his new opposite position on Cap and Trade. It does have appeal downstate in coal country though where he has to win by a huge margin to offset some of the Chicago vote he isn't going to get.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Azdak
September 15, 2009 7:19 PM
I had never seen Kirk in person until a recent "town hall" he did with Biggert in Naperville IL. He was in full campaign mode. What struck me was what a douchebag he is, given that he has long been considered one of the "good" republicans. But I guess they all have to "go rogue" these days to have any chance of winning the wingnut beauty contest.
He pretty much came out with the standard campaign geared to appeal to smug, white Chicago surburbanites who are afraid of black and brown people. It's pretty much a "paint by the numbers" approach--again it surprised me because he is supposed to be a smart guy, I thought he would have more creativity.
All I could think of as I was listening was where he expected to get his votes? In a blue state like Illinois, I don't see how you win an election with 3% of the African American vote, less than 15% Hispanics, almost no labor and, what, maybe 25% in Cook County. Last statewide election, voters preferred Blago to any republican--I don't think there are enough teabags to offset that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
September 15, 2009 10:34 PM in reply to Azdak
It's all part of his clever plan - when he loses, he'll claim that it's all ACORN's fault, and the base will believe it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?