Letters to the Editor Local Newspapers Daily Herald Chicago Tribune Chicago Sun-Times Pioneer Press

Tenth Congressional District Democrats, Lake County, Cook County, Illinois

Tenth Dems invites you to advertise your products or services in this space.
Please contact the Tenth Dems WEB Team for more information.

Shop for Democracy!

Friday, May 16, 2008

Hon. Lauren Beth Gash, Chair

• TenthDems Online Store

• Latest News

• Congressional Watch

• Campaign 2008

• Other Links

• Letters to the Editor

• Your Elected Officials

• Register to Vote

• Contact Us

Upcoming Events

May 15, 2008
Phone Bank for Dan Seals at Deerfield Headquarters

May 16, 2008
Road Trip to Louisville, Kentucky, with Illinois for Hillary

May 17, 2008
Door to Door Canvassing with Dan Seals in Arlington Heights

May 17, 2008
Travel to Kentucky for Obama Campaign

more...

Random Quote!

For NASA, space is still a high priority.

George Bush

Letters to the Editor!
Category:
- Taking Care of His Constituents - Sick
*Publisher: Pioneer Press Highland Park News* In the week before the House of Representatives recessed for its August vacation, Congressman Mark Kirk voted “NO” against the passage of two people-caring bills: H.R. 3159: Ensuring Military Readiness Through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act. Kirk, who never misses an opportunity to remind us of his Naval Reserve status and professes to be an advocate for those in the armed forces, voted against providing those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan with a minimum period of rest and recuperation between being re-deployed to the war zone. Our fighting men and their families deserved a ‘YES” vote from Congressman Kirk but didn’t get one. Kirk also voted “NO” when H .R. 3162 (The Children’s Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007) came up for a vote. This legislation added 5 million more uninsured children to the successful State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Funding for the program which was due to expire at the end of September will provide healthcare for 12 million children in low income families. Kirk who tries to take a lot of credit for the issues upon which most people agree - pollution of Lake Michigan and contaminated food and lead based painted toys . - wont vote for people in need: our servicemen, their families and uninsured children in low income families *Stu Kronish*
- Kirk now backs Bush plan
*Publisher: Wilmette Life* Having cast a token vote against the “surge”, U.S. Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, R-10th, now backs the president’s new Iraq “plan” to the hilt and opposes further Congressional oversight. The House will soon vote on measures that would allow only troops that are fully trained, equipped, and rested to be deployed to Iraq, and require the president to certify periodically that benchmarks which he himself set are being met. Representative Kirk says these conditions could prevent the use of “surged” troops to help our forces already there. Let’s be clear: There would be no reinforcements available if President Bush had heeded Rep. Kirk’s vote against the surge. Kirk’s position is tantamount to voting for the continued deployment of insufficiently trained and ill-equipped men and women in Iraq, on an undefined mission with no objective criteria for success. Let’s be clearer: This is the same arrogance that sent forces into battle four years ago without a proper “Phase IV” post-invasion plan. It’s the same incompetence that continues to send brave men and women into harm’s way without the right body and vehicle armor. It’s the same neglect that allowed munitions sites to go unsecured, providing insurgents with the material that they’ve used to attack our soldiers and Marines for the last 1,400 days. It’s the same pathetic illogic by which those responsible for these blunders still maintain that they “support the troops.” Let’s be crystal clear: Although we have our hands full with the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan, our representative is now trying to drum up support for a gasoline boycott of Iran. Rather than expanding the fiasco he helped create, perhaps he could attend to the mice, mold and misery that await our wounded heroes at Walter Reed. Those problems arose and festered while our supposedly influential representative was a leading member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs during the last Congress. It may be too much to ask that Rep. Mark Steven Kirk feel a pang of shame about this sorry record. But it is not too much to hope that those who have supported him, in their editorial endorsements and with their votes, will look more closely and more critically in the future. *Stewart Schoder Glencoe*
- Reader questions Kirk
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* During a presentation Feb 3,2007 at Kenilworth Union Church, Congressman Mark Kirk faulted the CIA for giving the Bush Administration the impression, back in 2002, that the Iraqi government intended to build nuclear weapons. Congressman Kirk was wrong. How he can still believe this, after all we have learned about how the White House marched us into conflict in Iraq, is a mystery to me. As far back as December 2003, there was overwhelming evidence that the CIA in 2002 had refuted the idea that Iraq was pursuing a nuclear program. the Chicago Tribune reported (12/25/03, sec.1, page 26, "Panel:CIA was disregarded in uranium claim) ...the White House was so anxious "to grab onto something affirmative" about Sadam Hussein's nuclear ambitions that it disregarded warnings from the intelligence community that the claim was questionable." CIA Director George Tenet had removed such information from a presidential address in Cincinnati on October 7, 2002, only to see the language reappear in the President's 2003 State of the Union address. Makes you wonder where Congressman Kirk gets his information, doesn't it? *Robert B. Emerson Glenview*
- Put cannon in museum
*Publisher: Wilmette Life* I wish to add my thoughts concerning exhibiting the cannon on the lawn of our Village Hall. I believe that as long as the cannon was on the lawn of the American Legion, that was good and proper as that was an organization where it belonged. But I do not believe that Northbrook wants to appear as a village that believes in what the cannon represents. I believe that the cannon should be placed in a war museum. It would represent one type of armament used in a particular war. I do not want our village to appear to see war as a positive way to resolve differences. There are peaceful alternatives to war. *Patricia L. Dickmann Northbrook*
- Find a peaceful symbol
*Publisher: Northbrook Star* Please accept this message as a suggestion for our beloved village to set an example of peace for our community. It is time to stop the condoning of violence in our environs. Please, let's choose something life-affirming to honor the contribution of our vets -- maybe a sculpture of a soldier carrying a flag, or saving a child. Thanks for listening. *Stephanie Meis Northbrook*
- Cannon display outmoded
*Publisher: Northbrook Star* The time to display weapons of warfare as an honor to those who fought and died in military service is long passed, in my opinion. The proposal to display the old cannon from the American Legion on the lawn of Village Hall is very flawed. I think the community of Northbrook and the country as a whole should have evolved enough in the 21st century to express honor to veterans in a manner that appreciates their lives and sacrifices with more dignity than displaying a tool of death on public property. I take no issue with any organization that chooses such a display on their private property. For years I have driven past that cannon at the Legion's building on Pfingsten Road and never had any objections to seeing it there or had given it a second thought. But to display that same weapon on public property near Village Hall, next to the Northbrook Public Library and across from Greenbriar Elementary School is truly not appropriate. My immediate family has veterans of World War II, Korea and Vietnam. I am no stranger to military memorial services. The Vietnam War Memorial in Washington, D.C. has shown there are more creative ways to honor the lives of fallen soldiers and veterans. The current Freedom Park at Village Hall with its flagpole, plaque and flower bed is another peaceful way to honor. There are alternatives for this cannon that should be considered. It could be donated to a military museum. Or it could go to another private organization. It does not belong near Northbrook Village Hall. *Gregory Mysko Northbrook*
- Kirk not getting message
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* Nov. 7 should have sent a message to 10th Congressional District Congressman Mark Kirk about the war in Iraq; I see no evidence of that. Challenger Dan Seals failed to unseat Congressman Kirk by a narrow margin. Seals, a virtual political unknown, campaigned that the United States needs an exit strategy from Iraq. The Baker/Hamilton committee recommends that we exit Iraq as soon as possible. The vast majority of Americans think President Bush has mishandled the war. In checking Congressman Kirk’s Web site, I find no mention of Iraq in his discussion of foreign policy. Perhaps Congressman Kirk did not get the message: the war was ill conceived, started under false pretenses and has been totally mismanaged. I would like to know how Congressman Kirk feels about the Baker/Hamilton report on Iraq. To continue avoiding any discussion with his constituents about Iraq, once must conclude he agrees with President Bush to “stay the course.” Congressman Kirk had much to say when we went to war, now his silence speaks louder than his words. Please Congressman Kirk, what are your ideas for ending this war? *Tom Jennings Northfield*
- Scorecard misleading
*Publisher: Pioneer Press* In a recent e-mailing (Oct. 20), Congressman Mark Kirk states that "Congressman Kirk has better environmental positions than his opponent. It's no surprise to us. According to the League of Conservation Voters 2006 Vote Scorecard, Congressman Kirk's 75 percent score is higher than Senator Clinton." Don't be fooled. Congressman Kirk is not running against Senator Clinton! His opponent is Dan Seals. Since Seals has not held office, the League can't compare his record to Kirk's. Kirk's citation of the League's Scorecard is equally misleading: it tells the truth, but not the whole truth. Kirk's 75 percent score holds for 2006. The whole truth is that Kirk's score for the 109th Congress is 53 percent, his score for 2005 was 39 percent, and his lifetime score is 61 percent. It looks like Kirk boosted his 2006 score for the election year. It might be noted that the League has not endorsed him, and the Sierra Club has also withheld its endorsement from Congressman Kirk. The truth is that Congressman Kirk's record on environmental issues is mixed, at best. For example, he voted for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, when it really mattered, after he voted against it. Yes, a flip-flop. *Kent Wilson Glenview*
- Kirk doesn't return e-mail request
*Publisher: Pioneer Press* A few weeks ago, I e-mailed Representative Mark Kirk and asked a simple question: could he say how often he had voted in support of President Bush's agenda, and how often he had voted against it? A week went by. I didn't hear anything, so I wrote again with same question. Again, there was no reply. A third request only brought more silence. I'm surprised. If Congressman Kirk is a proud supporter of his President and his party, you'd think he'd want people to know. By the same token, if he is committed to exercising Congress's role in our system of checks and balances, you'd think he'd want people to know that too. But the Congressman would rather leave us guessing. Rather than running on his record, he seems to be running from it. Instead of taking a principled stand, his first, and only, principle seems to be that of his own political survival. His non-answer makes it clear: it's time for a change. It's time to elect someone who will give it to us straight. *Steven Eckerstrom Lake Bluff*
- Why are they getting brush-off from Kirk?
*Publisher: DailyHerald* Over the past year, Lake County United, a non-partisan organization of churches, synagogues, mosques, and non-profit and labor organizations, has attempted without success to meet with Rep. Mark Kirk. Since his re-election in 2004, he has told us repeatedly that he would meet with us to discuss the issues that Lake County United has been actively working on for the past two years: housing, health care, education and immigration. Yet Rep. Kirk will not meet with Lake County United. After his remarks to the 2005 International Institute for Nanotechnology Symposium at Northwestern University, members of Lake County United contacted Rep. Kirk to discuss his remarks regarding discrimination against Muslims and Arabs. Several leaders from our member congregations contacted his office and sent letters requesting a meeting. The meetings were either canceled at the last minute, or Rep. Kirk failed to show. Now, as recently as last month, we were told that he was too busy to meet. Too busy to meet with his constituents who wish to discuss his views on a variety of issues that impact the members of Lake County United (his constituents). Does Rep. Kirk not wish to discuss where he stands on immigration, health care, housing and transportation with his constituents? Lake County United would like to know what he believes and how he will represent his constituents, members of Lake County United, in Washington, D.C. We stand ready to meet with Rep. Kirk. *Sue McWilliams Lake Bluff*
- Kirk campaigner costs his boss a vote
*Publisher: Daily Herald* On Oct. 22, I witnessed a most despicable act. While waiting for friends at a restaurant on the corner of Wolf Road and Kensington Road in Mount Prospect, at 11:15 a.m. on Oct. 19, I watched a young man place a Mark Kirk sign on the northeast corner of the intersection. I then watched him pull out a Dan Seals sign! Why did he need to do this? Why did he disrespect another candidate�s sign? Why did he litter the area by tossing the sign on the ground? Mark Kirk is responsible for the action of his people. I had confidence in him; however, this act is inexcusable. My wife approached the young man and told him to replace the sign. He called her an idiot. She was very upset by his abusive manner and totally unnecessary name calling. I am stunned and repulsed by this action. Kirk had my vote in the past, but his people are acting under his direction, and this is how they perform their responsibilities? I am no longer confident in his leadership abilities. Is this how he campaigns? Is this how he handles other issues under his responsibility? It was dishonest, unethical and rude. I am confident that law enforcement agencies will take whatever action is necessary to correct this most unfortunate display of criminal behavior. *Richard T. Dall Lake Forest*
- Kirk's silence speaks
*Publisher: Pioneer Press* Representative Mark Kirk's silence on the recent congressional page scandal once again shows his priority is to support the republican majority in congress instead of standing up for the "moderate" values he talks about. Re.Kirk's Web site states: "Congressman Kirk is leading efforts to protect our kids from online sexual predators." If protecting children from Internet predators is a priority for Rep. Kirk, why is there no statement anywhere on his Web site demanding accountability for the recent failure of the House Republican leadership to take action after being aware for months, if not years, of improper e-mail exchanges between former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) and teenage pages? Representative Kirk, as an assistant whip for the republicans, should be in a perfect position to exercise his "thoughtful and independent" leadership on an issue he has identified as a centerpiece of his campaign. His silence indicates he is more concerned with protecting Majority Leader Hastert in an election year than taking an opportunity to speak out on the importance of protecting teenagers. Sadly, this is the most recent example in a series of actions by Rep. Kirk that show his priority is to protect his republican colleagues in congress rather than hold officials accountable for illegal or unethical actions. For example, he voted to change congressional ethics rules to prevent an ethics complaint against Tom DeLay (R-Texas). He also voted to end an investigation of DeLay, who later resigned following a felony indictment. In addition, Rep. Kirk repeatedly voted to close investigations of potentila misconduct by members of congress regarding convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Representative Robert Ney (R-Ohio) was subsequently the first elected official to plead guilty to corruption charges stemming from the Abramoff investigation. It is time for a change in Washington. We need leaders who do not place partisan politics ahead of their promises and our values. A vote for Dan Seals will send the message that 10th District voters want to restore accountability and common sense to Washington. *Paul Gibson Highland Park*
- Ethics lapse
*Publisher: Lake County News-Sun* Based on the news that Mark Kirk's campaign has engaged in threatening supporters of his opponent, Dan Seals, I am writing to respectfully ask that you rescind your endorsement of Mark Kirk. Voters in the 10th District have a real choice this November in Dan Seals and there is no reason to reelect a politician like Kirk who peddles his influence on the Appropriations Committee along with the melodramatic, yet ominous, warning from an aide: "Revenge is a dish best served cold." It is time for voters to say "enough" of this ethics-starved style of governing. Access and influence have been doled out to the likes of Jack Abramoff and other lobbyists to the detriment of the American electorate and democracy itself. And now, we learn that Mark Kirk believes that he can trade the power that we, the voters of the 10th District, have entrusted in him for political support. I was puzzled by Mark Kirk's continued support for Tom "The Hammer" DeLay as House majority leader long after DeLay's ethical problems became obvious. Now comes the revelation that Kirk's campaign issued veiled threats to use his position on the Appropriations Committee to withhold support and funding for Tel Aviv University because Robert M. Schrayer, who is the national chairman of the Tel Aviv University American Council and on the board of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, supports Dan Seals for Congress. It is clear that Kirk has learned well from the Hammer and sunk into the muck with the rest of the House leadership. To quote former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough, this new breed of Republicans has raised "cronyism to an art form." The American people and the people of the 10th District deserve better and we have a better candidate in Dan Seals. *Brenda Robert Lake Forest*
- Wrong intervention
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* I cant understand why Mark Kirk would find it necessary to intervene in the private family decisions of the Schiavo family and not in the lives of Congressional pages. Who does Mr. Kirk truly care about? *David Savard Winnetka*
- Seals shows courage as Kirk fails to show
*Publisher: Daily Herald* I find it ironic that Dan Seals, candidate for congress in the 10th Congressional District, was the sole candidate on the evening of Oct. 18 on WTTW-TV's "Chicago Tonight" program. It was announced that Mark Kirk, the incumbent, was invited to participate but according to his staff, "his schedule would not permit it." The irony lies in the fact that Mr. Kirk was not too busy to call me at 7:10 as Dan Seals began his interview on Chicago television. It was one of those telephone conference calls they call a "Town Meeting" that reaches hundreds, if not thousands of people at the same time. How insulting it is to learn that Mr. Kirk declined to be face-to-face with his opponent. I'm not really surprised. Dan Seals' interview showed how intelligent and courageous he is. Seals' thoughts and ideas must cause Kirk to pause and think about his next job: that of ex-congressman. Mr. Seals showed his leadership in front of the WTTW television audience. My vote goes to Dan Seals. *Steve Rosensweig Buffalo Grove*
- More information on Seals, please
*Publisher: Chicago Tribune* While I'm not at all surprised that the Tribune endorsed Mark Kirk in the 10th district ("Melissa Bean's moxie," Editorial, Oct. 19), since the paper has been supportive throughout his term regardless of the number of bad votes and misleading statements he has made, I am truly disappointed that more space wasn't given to justify the description of Dan Seals, the Democratic challenger, as "impressive." Aside from Kirk's record, which is not in line with the moderate constituents of the 10th, Kirk has been evasive during this entire campaign. He has shunned all but one debate. I have seen Seals in a number of settings where both candidates were invited, but Kirk chose not to appear. Kirk did not even show up for WTTW's Chicago Tonight program, although nearly all other local Congressional candidates are joining those forums so that voters can evaluate their options. So why is Seals impressive? Beyond his intelligence, his education, and his experience both on Capitol Hill and in the private sector, Seals is honest and direct. At his appearances he takes all questions and isn't hesitant to explain why some have no easy answers and may require somewhat painful solutions. He is thoughtful, sincere and independent. Nearly everyone who meets him walks away a supporter. Kirk, like Bush, only appears where his audience is friendly and takes only pre-submitted, approved questions. The Tribune is correct that we in the 10th District have stronger choices than most, but I would like to have seen more information about both men. *Nancy Pred Winnetka*
- Mark Kirk a bad choice
*Publisher: Chicago Tribune* Some Tribune endorsements are so off the mark as to warrant an immediate response. For the Trib to refer to the 10th District's Mark Kirk as a "moderate" stretches all definitions of the word ("Melissa Bean's moxie," Editorial, Oct. 19). Kirk has voted with the Bush administration more than 90 percent. He is a deputy Republican whip. For the Trib to state that Kirk is in step with his district is a misreading of the district. There may be some voters in the 10th who agreed with Kirk's rush to vote with his Republican comrades to maintain Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, and to cut funds for veterans, but the majority of his constituents are appalled by these votes. When Kirk voted to drill in the Alaskan wildlife preserve, his display of being out of touch elicited enough voter outrage that Kirk had to change his vote. Kirk's opponent, Dan Seals, is a vigorous, active campaigner, who much more speaks to the attitudes and needs of his constituents. *Marsha Anderson*
- Dan Seals will better serve the 10th
*Publisher: Chicago Tribune* I was very disappointed to read the Tribune's endorsement of incumbent Republican Mark Kirk for Illinois' 10th Congressional District. Its reasons for this endorsement are flawed ("Melissa Bean's moxie," Editorial, Oct. 19). The Tribune suggests that Mr. Kirk "reflects his district well," however, it fails to mention that Mark Kirk voted in favor of government intervention in the Terry Schiavo case. I do not believe this vote reflected the will of Mr. Kirk's consitutients in the 10th District. What it does demonstrate is that Mark Kirk, when push comes to shove, will vote the way the Republican majority wants him to, even when it does not reflect the moderate leanings of the 10th District. In fact, more than 90 percent of Mr. Kirk's votes are with the Republican majority. The Tribune also claims that Mr. Kirk is strong on environmental issues, yet it fails to point out that this year Sierra Club has chosen not to endorse him and that the League of Conservation Voters has given Mr. Kirk a lowly 39 percent approval rating. In terms of Mark Kirk's alleged support of veteran's issues, he has consistently voted for the Bush budgets, which have slashed funding of veteran's benefits. As the Tribune points out, Dan Seals, the Democratic challenger, is an impressive candidate. Dan Seals will truly serve the 10th District well and will listen to his constituents rather than to Denny Hastert and the rest of the Republican leadership. *Jodi Marvet Buffalo Grove*
- Paper wrong in its endorsement of Kirk
*Publisher: Daily Herald* I could not believe my eyes when I turned to the Opinion column this morning (Oct. 18) and saw that the Daily Herald had chosen Mark Kirk in the 10th Congressional District. The Herald claims that Kirk is responsible and attentive to his district. As a resident of the district, I refute that premise. Kirk has been very unresponsive to the people of the 10th. Unlike his predecessor, John Porter, he seldom asks for opinions or has meetings with his constituents. He is also unresponsive to his moderate district when he votes 90 percent with the Republican majority. The Herald supports Kirk despite taking issue with his stand on Iraq and his refusal to acknowledge holes in the country�s safety net. These two issues should trouble people in the 10th District. The Iraq war �lie� has not only taken the lives of almost 3,000 American soldiers and 600,000 Iraqis, but has hurt every sector of America�s economy. According to the National Priorities Project, the Iraq war has cost America over $335 billion and counting. Illinois taxpayers pay approximately $5.4 billion a year for this war, and $17.4 billion since the war started. Think of all that could have been accomplished in our country with that lost money. America could have real homeland security. We would not have huge national debts, unfunded education mandates, health-care concerns, and continued oil dependency. Think about how Kirk has dropped the ball on all of these major issues, and if that is not enough for you, look how he has stood with his party of corruption and refused to demand congressional oversight. The Herald is wrong. Kirk is not the candidate that is the deep breath of fresh air. The candidate who will really open the window and bring fresh air to Congress is Dan Seals. *Karen Gabbert Arlington Heights*
- What did Kirk know about Foley matter?
*Publisher: Daily Herald* I�m amazed at how the Republican leadership in Congress ignored the behavior of Rep. Mark Foley. According to published reports, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert was the highest-ranking Republican leader who knew of Foley�s sexually explicit e-mails with a congressional page, and covered up those facts. Rep. Mark Kirk, from the 10th District, is a Republican leader in Congress holding the title of Assistant Majority Whip. It seems to me unlikely that he did not have the same knowledge as Hastert and other GOP leaders concerning Foley�s sexual misconduct. The question needs to be asked: What did Kirk know about the activities of his colleague, Mark Foley? Kirk has spoken highly of Foley in the past. Both men are co-authors of the so-called �Suburban Agenda� that Kirk has been promoting heavily this year. Kirk is also a major co-sponsor of Foley legislation aimed at protecting children from sexual predators. Foley has also contributed substantial money to Kirk�s campaign. Foley resigned from Congress in shame earlier this month. And it is shameful that Dennis Hastert, Kirk and other Republican congressional leaders did nothing to reign in this congressman a year ago when these allegations first surfaced and to protect the high school age minors working for Congress. This is a fine example of Republican family values. *Gregory Mysko Northbrook*
- Kirk's avoiding talk of important issues
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Mark Kirk has begun to gear up for the Nov. 7 election by sending his constituents mailings outlining his biggest success as a three-term congressman � legislation targeting sex offenders on the Internet, expanding Metra service, and securing funding for cleaning up Lake Michigan. Are these really the most important issues and all he has accomplished during three terms in Congress? While I applaud these efforts, I must ask this question: out of all of the legislation he has voted for or against, all the bills he has sponsored, and all of the issues he has tackled, why does Kirk point to these issues as his proudest accomplishments? Surely he has acted on more important issues � Iraq, Guantanamo, the budget, education, gun control, the economy, etc. As a congressman who shapes the course of our nation, these are issues that shape our lives. If he cannot proudly campaign on his record, why should we send him back to Washington, D.C.? As a voter I know that there is not the perfect candidate that I will agree with on every issue, but I would like a congressman who has enough integrity to stand by his record instead of running from it. *Ben Schuster Deerfield*
- Residency not a requirement
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* In L.M. Husack�s letter last week mention was made of the fact that Dan Seals does not live in the 10th District. That is a fact. Here are some additional pertinent facts: When Dan Seals and his family moved to Wilmette they were in the 10th District, until the most recent redistricting in 2002. One is not required to live in a district to run for Congress in that district. When Congressman Mark Kirk first ran for office in 2000, he did not live in the 10th District. He lived in Washington, D.C. where he had been a resident for almost 20 years. Let�s get the facts straight� all of the facts. *Carmen Corbett Wilmette*
- Kirk a poseur
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* A poseur is a person who attempts to influence others by assuming, insincerely, a particular attitude or stance. Mark Kirk, at least in his public life, is a poseur. The voters of the 10th Congressional District must examine closely the votes this Republican Congressman has cast and the positions he has taken, although Kirk has done his best to obfuscate these votes and positions through the fog of his campaign. Shining out through the mist, his record precludes his re-election and demonstrates the need for change. In a nutshell, Kirk�s habitual presentation of himself as a moderate is a sham. Simply look at the greeting on the home page of his Web site, where he touts �thoughtful, independent leadership� and characterizes himself as a �Member of Congress� at the �Center of the House�, without ever mentioning that he is, as the Assistant Majority Whip, at the top echelons of the Republican House leadership! Oddly, one is forced to look at the Web site�s Current News section to see references to fellow Republicans (but only dissident ones), and that his major concerns are blocking drilling at the Artic National Wildlife Refuge, eliminating drug gangs in North Chicago and providing express trains on the Metra. Even his lawn signs fail to mention his status as a Republican. What is he afraid of? The answer is obvious, his record as a chief proponent and enabler of the policies of the Bush Administration, Kirk voted for the disgraceful effort to intervene in the Terri Schiavo matter, approved each of the Bush�s Administration�s deficit budgets, refuses to demand a change in policy on the Iraq War, and has obligingly handed George Bush unfettered executive powers which would cause the Founding Fathers to gasp. Standing alone, any one of these actions is shameful; collectively, they demonstrate that Kirk no longer has any legitimate claim to his current Congressional seat, et alone any higher office. Do not be fooled by this poseur. A major change in the direction of Congress is urgently required in order to restore the system of checks and balances that our government is based upon and to protect our liberties, our property and the lives of our fellow citizens. Please vote on Now. 7th for the Democratic candidate, Dan Seals, who truly offers the thoughtful, independent leadership this District deserves. *Darryl R. Davidson Wilmette*
- Congress proves it can't police itself
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Congress proves it can�t police itself On Rep Mark Kirk�s blog of Oct. 5, he lists amendments to the House rules to handle inappropriate behavior of a congressman with a minor. Despite all these rule changes, he still wants to have Congress investigate itself. This is like having the fox guard the hen house. Wake up Rep. Kirk. Congress cannot police itself. That did not work in 1983, when Rep. Daniel Crane, R-IL, had sexual relations with a female House page. And it has not prevented Rep. Mark Foley, R-FL ,from his predatory behavior toward a minor. What we need is a permanent independent, non-partisan investigator. I expected more from my congressman. But I guess he is just part of the good-old-boys network back in Washington. *Jack Strom Highland Park*
- Seals clearly is part of the community
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Dan Seals lives in Wilmette. His wife works in Glenview. Two of his three children were born while he lived in Wilmette. His school-age children attend school in Wilmette. Since Dan Seals moved to Wilmette, a tiny portion of this community was re-apportioned to be part of another district. His home fell into that district. He has promised that, when he is elected, he will move the block or two that is required to be part of the 10th Congressional District. Mark Kirk essentially, lives in Washington, D.C. He has spent all of his adult life out of the 10th District. He was living in Washington when he decided to run for Congress in our district. He moved here temporarily with the promise that he would move here permanently, if elected. At present, Rep. Kirk resides more in Washington, D.C., than in Illinois. His wife works for the CIA in Washington and she has bought a home there. Seals� political views are more in tune with the 10th District than those of his opponent. He is a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. Kirk has voted 91 percent with Tom DeLay and George W. Bush. Kirk is an assistant majority whip in the House. This means that not only does he vote along strict party lines but he prevails upon others to do so. Kirk�s assertions of his independence in his advertising are a shocking lack of honesty. Don�t vote before checking his voting record at www.kirkfacts.com. *Colleen Berk Wilmette*
- Groups opposing Kirk show courage
*Publisher: Daily Herald* I would like to commend the Sierra Club, both the Illinois chapter and National, as well as the League of Conservation Voters in their decision to not re-endorse our current congressman, Mark Kirk. While Kirk�s ads and his supporters campaign as if he is endorsed by the environmental groups, this finally puts paid to the notion that he has been good for the environment. It takes a great deal of integrity and courage to go against an incumbent, as most organizations compromise and minimize their demands in order to support them, just to ensure some measure of influence over the politician�s votes. It is just too bad that more organizations can�t hold themselves to the high standards of the few; many require little demonstration of support for their cause. All I can say is, if you ask for little, you can�t expect a lot. These days, voters have come to depend upon endorsing organizations to guide them through the morass of legislation, to clarify candidates� positions. In giving Kirk a failing grade, the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters are sending a clear message to voters as well as the candidates. In doing so, these organizations build credibility and leverage ; getting their endorsement now really means that they hold their endorsees accountable for their votes and will not accept less. After six years, Kirk has enough of a record that he�s received a vote of �no confidence� from conservationists. *Karen Fujisawa Winnetka*
- Kirk should agree to more debates
*Publisher: Daily Herald* A number of area synagogues have asked Mark Kirk to participate in forums giving him the choice to appear before, after or with Dan Seals. Kirk has declined every invitation. The League of Women Voters has asked Kirk to participate in a series of six debates throughout the 10th District. Kirk agreed to two � both on weeknights in inconvenient areas for a large portion of the district. Kirk supporters commend his meager participation, citing his emphasis on legislating. No matter that Congress recesses for the election early, or that other incumbents have adjusted their schedules to appear before their constituents. Instead of allowing voters to evaluate both candidates and have the opportunity to ask questions, Seals is being targeted in a whisper campaign. The whisper campaign is all about disseminating misinformation, either incorrect or misleading, a typical far-right Republican tactic. The first item of the whisper campaign is that Seals does not live in the district. The whisperers do not mention that Kirk did not live in the district when he was first elected. Residency is not required until elected. The whisper campaign mentions that, as an African-American, Seals will not support Israel. Further, the whisperers say, once in Congress, he will become a member of the Congressional Black Caucus and further distance himself from supporting Israel. To this he replies, �Once in Congress, I will stand on my own.� Seals explained that as a congressman he will be in a position to put forth his own ideas on the importance of a strong, secure Israel to the Black Caucus. Is it preferable to use a whisper campaign over forums and debates? That is what the constituents of the district should to be whispering about. *Neal Blustein Northbrook*
- How well does Kirk know his district?
*Publisher: Daily Herald* I have lived in Mark Kirk�s district for 25 years. I bought a new house just down the road from my old house, still in the district. I was surprised to get a letter welcoming me to the district from Kirk�s office. But I guess the congressman and his staff did not know I lived in his district longer than he has lived in the district. In fact, Kirk has only lived in the district since he decided to run for the seat. I hope he does a better job of tracking legislation than he does of tracking his constituents. *George J. Gountanis*
- Congress race vital
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* The race for the House of Representatives, between Dan Seals and Mark Kirk, is a crucial event. Between the wars on terror and Iraq, the Katrina incompetence, and the huge deficits, the country is running off track. We have had one party rule for six years, and our system of checks and balances has broken down. John Dean, a highly credentialed Republican (aide to Richard Nixon), has honestly critiqued the current administration, in his book, �Conservatives without Conscience.� He states that the Bush-men are not conservatives, but authoritarians, who have hijacked the party, and the country. As he says, �They are �capable of plunging this nation into disasters the likes of which we have never known.� Kirk is a nice guy. But, even though he appears to be a moderate, he votes in lockstep with his party 90 percent of the time. He is part of the problem. Seals is running for the first time, starting with no name recognition, and little money. He is such a brigh, outstanding candidate, that he has turned a ho-hum race into a tsunami, raising a million dollars, and pulling almost even with Kirk. For those who don�t know him- he has an M.A. in public policy from Johns Hopkins, an MBA from the University of Chicago, and he served as a Presidential Management Fellow in the Clinton Administration. (His dad was a Chicago Bear) He is a strong supporter of Israel, has a plan to carefully disengage from Iraq, will fight a smarter war on terror, and he believes in science. He has the vision, and leadership skills to bring the innovative change that Washington desperately needs. This is one of the few times in history, when a vote in a congressional race will make such a vital difference in national and international policy. I hope that when people go into the voting booth this November, they will vote for Dan Seals - a vote for intelligence instead of ideology, and competence instead of cronyism. Edmund Burke said that �The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.� Do something this November and vote for the vibrant leadership of Dan Seals. *Carol Kraines Deerfield*
- Kirk should address Darfur genocide
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* The last three years has seen continued killings, rapes, and genocide in Darfur, Sudan. More than 200,000 lives have been lost and over 2.5 million have been left homeless. The United Nations has called this �the world�s worst humanitarian crisis.� Publicity and media coverage has begun to increase and marches and protest around the globe are proliferatin. Unfortunately, the Sudanese government refuses to permit UN peacekeepers into the area, despite a UN Security Council resolution that approved a peacekeeping force of 20,000 troops. The United States must use all available means - diplomatic and financial - to ensure the rapid deployment of peacekeepers in Darfur. To sit by in inaction due to apathy, hopelessness, or lack of understanding is not acceptable. We must take action! I write this letter to reprimand our Congressman Mark Kirk on his apathy and zero profile on this great humanitarian crisis. Scrutinizing his Web site, press releases, and speeches, there is no mention of Darfur. Kirk is currently serving his third term in Congress, is a member of the House Appropriations Committee and serves on three of its subcommittees. It is unsatisfactory and repugnant that he is remiss on addressing such an important and timely issue. *Mark Segal Glencoe*
- Kirk says no to Vote Smart
*Publisher: Glencoe News* I thought that I had witnessed the epitome of arrogance in Secretary Rumsfelf, a former member of the House of Representatives on the North Shore but Rumsfeld will have to move over-Mark Kirk now occupies that position. An organization wholly bi-partisan in nature called Project Vote Smart publishes the record of all U.S. House and Senate members and one of the questions asked of all members is, �Are you willing to tell citizens your positions on the issues you will most likely face on their behalf?� A reasonable question, you would agree. Sadly, Mr Kirk answered, �No.� Imagine, a member of Congress unwilling to discuss his positions. Maybe Tom DeLay told him how to vote on that question. He followed DeLay�s lead on 97 percent of the issues. It is time to give Kirk the boot and install a fresh face that will be responsive to the voters of the district instead of DeLay instructions. I strongly urge a vote for Dan Seals. I can assure you that Dan will discuss his positions on all of the issues, anytime, anyplace. Incidentally, those who think that Project Vote Smart is a Democratic partisan organization will be surprised to learn that among its Republican members are: Senator John McCain, John Sununu, Gordon Smith, Bill Frist and finally, Newt Gingrich, Richard Kleindienst and Jim Leach. *Marvin P Miller Wilmette*
- Choosing his forums
*Publisher: Wilmette Life* It�s nice that Rep. Kirk recently had time for a rare appearance in our district to discuss the important issue of food allergies before a group of concerned parents 10 weeks before an election. It�s a shame he could not find time during a Congressional recess in January 2006 to be a guest panelist along with Lt Gen Robert S Gard, Jr. (USA Ret) to discuss another important issue: strategies for ending the war in Iraq. Rep Kirk had an opportunity to address approximately 400 Tenth District constituents, but declined. *Marianne Wood Lake Forest*
- Kirk weakened ethics laws
*Publisher: Wilmette Life* Kirk weakened ethics laws A recent letter in the Pioneer Press commented on Mark Kirk�s integrity. Last year, when Tom DeLay�s troubles were just starting to surface, Mark Kirk quietly voted to weaken ethics laws in the House of Representatives. The change Kirk voted for actually made it harder to investigate House members accused of wrongdoing. Although claiming independence, Kirk has consistently voted with the Republican majority. This Republican controlled Congress has feathered the pocketbooks of the wealthy while seriously undermining our economy, our constitutional civil liberties, and the environment. The war of occupation in Iraq has cost us billions of dollars as well as the respect of the international community while deflecting much needed resources from effective measures to protect us at home. We want a representative for the 10th District who will vote for those who seek a living wage, adequate health care and social programs that benefit those who truly need help. Dan Seals is not afraid to challenge corruption in government. Seals brings us both practical business experience and a commitment to building a more just and sustainable world. *Paul and Ann Nick Deerfield*
- Follow the money
*Publisher: Wilmette Life* According to Wikipedia, Mark Kirk received money from : American Prosperity PAC controlled by Duke Cunningham who pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, and tax evasion. The law firm of Winston Strawn who represented former Republican governor George Ryan for no cost in his corruption trial where he was convicted on all 18 charges. Congressman Bob Ney who is under investigation for bribery and his involvement with convicted felone Jack Abramoff. Americans for a Republican Majority, a PAC formed by Tom DeLay . Halliburton, where Dick Cheney was CEO, and from Wal Mart, Exelon, Accenture, Abbott Laboratories, and Baxter International. At the end of this trail, do we want Mark Kirk representing us in Congress? *Mike Riley Glenview*
- Web site ignores Iraq
*Publisher: Glencoe News* I recently visited Congressman Mark Kirk�s Web site to gain some insight as to issues he is working on. To my dismay, I found not one word on the occupation of Iraq. America�s enemies have become more confident because of the failure of the Bush administration to produce regime change in Iraq. Over 30,000 Iraqi citizens have been killed in the past seven months; thousands of brave American soldiers have been killed or wounded. The Iraq occupation is a very important issue to me; I believe my congressman should address the subject. Kirk may feel the war was justified and is just not going well. Therefore, he does not want to talk about it. But this issue will not go away by not talking about it. Congressman Kirk has consistently supported the Bush administration in its plans for the invasion of Iraq and in the continued occupation of Iraq. He should stand up tell the voters of the 10th Congressional District his plans for ending our involvement from this national and international tragedy. Congressman Kirk�s silence on Iraq can only mean his support of the war was more for political ambition and ideological reasons than about the war itself. Stop your silence Kirk, take a stand publicly one way or the other. *Tom Jennings Northfield*
- Six debates are needed between Kirk, Seals
*Publisher: Highland Park News* Dan Seals, the Democratic candidate for Congress in the Tenth District, has suggested that he and the U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk debate six times prior to the Nov. 7 election. According to the Pioneer Press, a spokesperson for Kirk was quoted as saying, �Given the Congressional calendar, the U.S. Rep. Has already agreed to discuss the issues on Oct 26 and Oct. 31.� These dates happen to fall on a Thursday and a Tuesday: working days for most people. Excluding the Jewish Holiday of Rosh Hashanah, there are 10 Saturdays and 10 Sundays before Election Day. I would think that Rep. Kirk would want to address the largest number of constituents and weekends rather than weekdays would best allow him to do so. I�m certain that the Congressman�s Congressional calendar can accommodate at least six debates combining weekends and weekdays since the House is scheduled to adjourn on Oct. 6 in order to allow its members to campaign. Why is Kirk offering only two debates less than two weeks prior to the election? A limited number of debates could not cover all of the important domestic, international and local issues facing our community and the nation. Seals is correct in suggesting at least six. *Stuart Kronish Highland Park*
- District entitled to debate
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* With the 2006 election campaign almost underway, I am perplexed and dismayed to hear that our stealth congressman, Mark Kirk, has declined to debate Dan Seals, the Democratic candidate for the 10th congressional seat. It is apparent from the well-organized Seals campaign efforts to date, very successful fund-raising, and large cadre of dedicated volunteers already at work, that Mark Kirk is faced with a real race for re-election in 2006. The 10th District is no longer a �safe seat� for the Republican Party as evidenced by national election results since 1996. The 10th District voted for Clinton, Gore and Kerry in increasing numbers in each election. Dan Seals takes serious issues with Congressman Kirk on many of his positions on issues important to voters in the District, including the Iraq War; the Bush tax cuts that have diverted resources from those who need them most; governmental interference in private matters; reducing the benefits of veterans, etc, etc. The constituents of the 10th District are entitled to hear the positions of both candidates in a series of face-to-face debates between Labor Day and Election Day, Nov. 7. This is something that Mark Kirk has refused to do in previous election campaigns. Why? What has he got to hide? What reason could he possibly have for refusing to debate Dan Seals, a legitimate candidate for the `10th Congressional seat? I encourage Congressman Kirk to reconsider and schedule a series of 3-4 debates hosted by the League of Women Voters on predetermined issues to give the voters of the district an opportunity to make an informed decision on Nov.7 . *Carmen Corbett Wilmette*
- NSA abuses power
*Publisher: Glenview Announcements* Once again, Mark Kirk of the 10th Congressional District, who portrays himself as a moderate, has voted to help the Bush Administration by facilitating its domestic spying operation. On June 20, Kirk voted against the bi-partisan Schiff Amendment, which would have cut off funding for warrantless wiretapping conducted by the National Security Agency. Kirk once again voted to support the Administration�s abuse of power, and to enable the NSA to continue the illegal business of spying on innocent Americans in their homes without any judicial oversight. The Schiff Amendment would have had no impact on legal domestic wiretapping under FISA, targeting agents of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. I look forward to November, when we will have the chance to weigh in on our representative, who routinely concurs with this Administration. *Kathy Fishman Northfield*
- Kirk ducking debates
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* Dan Seals, the Democratic candidate for Congress in the Tenth District, has suggested that he and Congressman Mark Kirk debate six times prior to the Nov 7 election. According to the Pioneer Press, a spokesman for Kirk was quoted as saying, �Given the Congressional calendar, the congressman has already agreed to discuss the issues on Oct 26 and Oct 31.� These dates happen to fall on a Thursday and a Tuesday: working days for most people. Excluding the Jewish Holiday of Rosh Hashanah, there are 10 Saturdays and 10 Sundays before Election Day. I would think that Congressman Kirk would want to address the largest number of constituents and weekends rather than weekdays would best allow him to do so. I�m certain that the Congressman�s Congressional calendar can accommodate at least six debates combining weekends and weekdays since the House is scheduled to adjourn on Oct 6 in order to allow its members to campaign. Why is Kirk offering only two debates less than two weeks prior to the election? A limited number of debates could not cover all of the important domestic, international and local issues facing our community and the nation. Seals is correct in suggesting at least six. *Stuart Kronish Highland Park*
- Why did Kirk flip on education law?
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Last week, Rep. Mark Kirk (IL-10) was critical of President Bush�s �No Child Left Behind� law, saying that �we need to study, reassess and reform through peer-reviewed, expert-driven, nonpartisan data, how we teach.� I find it perplexing how Mr. Kirk can follow the Bush Administration lock and step in 2001 by voting for the legislation � ignoring groups such as the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers � and now, when he is fighting a tight race for re-election, have such a big change of heart. Furthermore, for the past four years, Kirk has touted the legislation as one of the cornerstones of his �Kids Come First� education platform, currently posted on his Web site: �President Bush signed into law H.R. 1, which is the most sweeping federal educational reform bill in decades. I strongly supported this bill.� It�s ironic that when Bush�s approval rating was high, Kirk was willing to follow the president, and now that the polls indicate the opposite, he wants to follow the teachers and the experts. So I ask, do kids really come first, or does Mr. Kirk�s re-election campaign? *Ben Schuster Deerfield*
- Kirk campaigns on taxpayers' tab
*Publisher: Daily Herald* haven�t heard this much from our current congressman, Republican Mark Kirk, in the almost six years he�s been in office. The two times that I tried to see him � with a group of concerned clergymen, to appeal to him to pass a more compassionate budget, his office called the police to get rid of us. Now, in a competitive election year, I get a four-page glossy campaign piece of literature every week, paid for by us, the taxpayers in the district. Similarly, he staged a rare �town hall� meeting by �phoning it in�; again, a blatant campaign strategy paid for by the taxpayers. No wonder he has over $2 million in the bank; he never has to spend his own money. The National Republican Campaign Committee has used the �Swift Boat� ad agency to represent him; he has taken over $50,000 in trips funded by special interest groups, with an additional $30,000 in trips funded by taxpayers (more than our two senators combined). He campaigns at a local synagogue, and the congregation pays for the advertisement of the event. All the publicity at our expense for thinly disguised election year ploys. And after five years of seeing the photo of Kirk and Bush with arms around each other on the front page of every report sent out by the poll-driven congressman, Bush has mysteriously disappeared, along with all references to Kirk�s being a Republican. With our bloated deficit, is this really a good use of our taxpayers� dollars? Didn�t we already have a revolution over this issue? We deserve better. I�m voting for Dan Seals. *Karen Fujisawa Winnetka*
- Kirk,staff not as responsive, after all
*Publisher: Daily Herald* I wasn�t surprised by Michael Menis�s letter (Fence Post, Aug. 5), �Kirk foe changes his tune for �06 election,� wherein he accuses me of propaganda. He apparently didn�t like my description of my meeting with Rep. Mark Kirk�s staff on the issue of Social Security privatization. Here are some facts that Mr. Menis won�t tell you in his defense of Mark Kirk. The description of my meeting with Kirk�s staff can be found, in full, at the following Web site: http://ellenofthetenth.blogspot.com. Look for the full blog entry under the 4/1/2005-4/31/2005 link, about one-fifth of the way down the page. I find it interesting that Mr. Menis didn�t reference the Internet link in his own letter. Perhaps the reason why can be explained by this part of my post: �The response from the staffers was � non-committal. And we were told more than once that we could leave feedback directly to Kirk via his website and that he would read every message.� If I wanted to leave Kirk feedback on his Web site, why would I be in his office? When I followed up with his office months later, I was told (again) that he was �too busy� to hold a town hall meeting on this issue and that I should leave feedback on his Web site. That was the straw that broke the camel�s back for me. A representative that doesn�t represent his constituents doesn�t deserve his job, in my book. As for Menis�s other ad hominem attacks on me (his attempt to tie me to �socialists�), I expected that sooner or later someone would attempt such a �swift boat� maneuver. The fact that such tactics have been regularly used by the GOP and its candidates are one of the things that drove me, as a relatively independent voter, away from them in the first place. It�s time to get away from such spin and negativity. It�s time to change the direction in which our country is heading. It�s time for Mark Kirk to go. My vote will go to Dan Seals on Nov. 7 *Matt Lowry Vernon Hills*
- Seals supports Israel
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* I was heartbroken to see the hateful mail from Renee Thaler creating a false view of Dan Seals� stance on Israel. As AIPAC has tried to work toward for years, support for Israel is an American value - not a Republican or Democrat partisan political stance. The U.S. has supported Israel because a majority of Americans believe that Israel�s future is tied to our own. It is a democracy, it is a leader in technological and medical innovations, but most importantly, Israel shares our notion of the value of every single life. Dan Seals is respectful of Mark Kirk�s record on Israel. And, when he is elected, he will work just as hard to protect Israel�s existence in Congress. I know this, because I was the first person to ask Dan to run for Congress - and the first question I asked was about his views on Israel. When you read Dan�s Web site, you can see that his support for Israel is based on a profound respect for that country and on his personal experience with the Jewish community when he was a child and young man. He feels a debt of gratitude for the generosity and openness and values that he encountered as a young kid going to JCC camps in Hyde Park. As Jews in America, we should be so grateful that we have jobs and lots of friends of Israel, not just one. *Anne Wedner Winnetka*
- Citizens deserve a debate
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* Rep. Mark Kirk�s �Suburban Agenda� is designed to �meet the needs of suburban families from Seattle to Atlanta.� It is nonsense to believe that the purported �suburban problems� are the same across the country. One initiative of The Suburban Agenda is a program to screen school applicants for criminal records. This practice is already in place in our local schools. Another initiative denies privacy rights to school lockers. Local high schools already reserve the right to search lockers as they are considered school property. In District 214, Dandy the drug dog routinely sniffs school lockers for illegal drugs. An additional provision in the agenda is the Online Predators Act requiring schools and libraries to block online social networks such as My Space. Most local schools already have rules in place against the use of these sites. Perhaps Mark Kirk should spend his time servicing the citizens of his district. After the passage of Medicare Part D, Kirk did not hole a single forum to explain the legislation in spite of its complexity. The citizens of the 10th deserve thoughtful, reasoned representation, not a cookie cutter approach to solving suburban problems. I�d like to hear Rep. Kirk and his November opponent, Dan Seals, publicly present their positions to the citizens of the 10th Congressional District. How about a debate? *Carol Blustein Northbrook*
- Candid communication
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* If the current Member of the House of Representatives from the 10th Congressional District wishes to receive feedback from his constituency, he must change what he is doing. On July 30, Congressman Kirk sent out an e-mail soliciting my opinion about immigration policy. He offered me four options through which to express my beliefs and preferences about this very important and complex national concern. However, none of the four suggestions matched my attitudes in any way. He did NOT offer me the opportunity to communicate my thoughts to him through an e-mail address or even a "contact" box. This is a perfect example of his failure to convince me that he really wants to hear from me. By presenting me with no options other than his, he misrepresents his intentions and is, at the very least, not being candid in his communications to me. Mari D Terman Wilmette
- Pay raise undeserved
*Publisher: News Sun* Congressman Mark Kirk voted to give himself a $3,300-a-year pay raise. He has received a pay raise every year since he entered Congress. Meanwhile, medium household incomes have fallen five years in a row after being adjusted for inflation. Health-care costs have risen almost 50 percent and the minimum wage remains at $5.15. Congressman Kirk doesn't deserve a pay raise when the House of Representatives are failing miserably on solutions for the Iraq war, health care, deficit spending, immigration, environmental problems and many other problems that concern the average American. *Karen Truskowski Lake Forest*
- Cheney's visit
*Publisher: News Sun* The excitement of Vice President Cheney's visit to Lake County and Lake Forest has dissipated and now allows for a balanced look at this remarkable visit. The arrival of Air Force Two at Waukegan Regional Airport is itself noteworthy. His Boeing 757 aircraft in its commercial version can seat at least 200 passengers. Will we soon see the major airlines flying from our doorstep? The News Sun reported additional hardware in the form of limos, arrived a few days earlier in a C-17 cargo plane. The vice president must be in a record book for funds raised in an hour: $300,000 (and from a mere 12 couples). Apparently, this money doesn't directly benefit any Lake County Republican candidate but was carried to the national committee. This large "take" likely pleases the Republican supporters of Cheney while it needs further examination as to financial accountability. Reading the account of two airport landings, a lineup of eight Waukegan squad cars, six state police squads, a bomb unit, a hazmat unit, Waukegan Fire Department trucks and rescue vehicles raises questions of cost. How much and who pays? Added to this are National Guard and Air Force personnel flying and refueling one or both planes, Secret Service agents, U.S. marshals, a Marine and a dog (bomb sniffing duty). I wonder how much of the $300,000 gross would remain if these costs were expensed against this "take." We are told Vice President Cheney will return soon to Lake County for the benefit of congressional candidate David McSweeney. Is anyone on the GOP side ready to assume the costs of the next fund-raising visit? *Philip J Carrigan Waukegan*
- Laying the blame where it really belongs
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Having recently moved to the bastion of knee-jerk Republicanism that is Lake County, I was pleasantly surprised to read Bernard Timmer�s excellent letter of May 30. He was quite correct in questioning the intelligence and judgment of millions of Americans who voted in 2004 to re-elect George W. Bush despite the president�s record of incompetence and downright deceit. In the fall of 2004, with his year-and-a-half-old war in Iraq going, uh, let�s say not exactly swimmingly, Bush and his cronies kept pushing for a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, which rallied his constituency and, along with the successful �swift-boating� of John Kerry, gave �W� the edge in that very close election. Shortly thereafter, Bush and the Republican congressional leadership suddenly abandoned this allegedly all-important issue; they moved on to revving up the war and attempting to privatize Social Security. Fast-forward another 18 months: Having failed even to stabilize Iraq, let alone winning the hearts and minds of its people, and then finally having figured out that Americans were not ready to turn over billions of dollars of Social Security funds to pay stockbrokers� fees, Bush and his handlers, with a mid-term election coincidentally on the horizon, have returned to their tried-and-true call to arms: �Ban gay marriage!� What a bunch of phonies. While I�m encouraged to find that most Americans now believe that going to war in Iraq was a mistake, it�s unfortunate that it took the recanters so long to come to their senses. Contributor Larry King of Gurnee urges Herald readers to put Mr. Timmer�s letters under their kitty litter. I would suggest, instead, that the remaining die-hard, pro-war Republicans in these environs laminate said letters and place them into some picture frames on their mantels � the ones now displaying the smiling faces of George Bush and Dick Cheney. *Robert E Friend Wauconda*
- This year he's voting Democratic
*Publisher: Daily Herald* This past weekend, I went to a friend�s house gathering to meet Dan Seals, the Democratic candidate for representative from the 10th Congressional District in the Nov. 7 election. I think we have a race and a real choice this time. I was a big supporter of our long time representative John Porter (a Republican). John�s passionate and effective championship of the National Institutes of Health and biomedical research funding was of particular interest to me. John was known as a moderate Republican in our marginally Democratic leaning district. Out of respect for John, when he retired I voted for his chosen heir, staffer Mark Kirk. This decision was made easier for me in the last two elections because the Democratic candidates were weak. However that has now changed. Mark Kirk�s tenure in the House has been unremarkable in initiative. I was dismayed to learn that Mr. Kirk has voted over 86 percent of the time with controversial (former) Majority Leader Tom DeLay. This Congress has brought us a mess in Iraq costing us priceless American lives and a $6 billion a month bill; a $534 billion, hopelessly complicated prescription drug plan; $7 billion in tax subsidies for oil companies which are recording record profits by charging me $60 to fill my gas tank; poor follow-up on rebuilding those lives affected by Katrina; questioning the science of global warming in favor of political ideology and a na�ve and simplistic immigration bill. All this while supporting additional tax cuts for the most fortunate among us, and reducing funding of the NIH, education and cutting $11 billion in Medicare/Medicaid for our most vulnerable neighbors. This has resulted in an $8.4 trillion federal debt. Even my most ardent Republican friends agree the country is on the wrong track. So I listened carefully to Dan Seals and in came a breath of fresh air. He�s got new ideas that more consistently mirror my values. He sees a responsible exit strategy for Iraq; a realistic solution to our burgeoning health care costs; a plan to restore fiscal discipline with spending cuts of earmark projects and rethinking future tax cuts; reducing oil dependence by formulating a comprehensive energy policy; and an even-handed approach to immigration. Dan also has something practical: a growing war chest to mount a viable campaign and get his vision out. I think we have a race and a real choice in the election for our representative for the 10th Congressional District. I�ll be listening more carefully to Dan Seals and not just rubber stamping my vote this fall. *Bob Gregory Lincolnshire*
- Vote the rascals out
*Publisher: Chicago Sun Times* For once, I think the National Rifle Association is right. We can't blame assault weapons for doing what they are designed, manufactured and marketed to do: fire as many bullets as quickly and easily as possible. In one recent week, gang members used these efficient killing machines to murder two Chicago children: Starkesia Reed, 14, and Siretha White, 10. NRA members used the girls' deaths to defend the weapons involved. They protested that assault weapons are mere inanimate objects. We all know the refrain: People, not guns, kill people. Indeed, when they mowed down Starkesia and Siretha and injured several others in less time than it takes you or I to dial a phone number, assault weapons were doing exactly what they are supposed to do. So, if the weapons aren't to blame, where does the blame lie? Remember the ban on assault weapons? Federal law used to make assault weapons illegal because, as President Bush explained, they simply don't belong on our streets. To paraphrase Gen. Wesley Clark, if you want to fire military-type weapons the United States has a place for you: in the military. But in 2004 the Republican majority in Congress decided to let the assault weapons ban expire. Why? The NRA opposed the ban. Republicans wouldn't let a measure to renew the ban even come up for a vote, despite polls showing that approximately 80 percent of Americans and police departments across the country favored the ban. My own Republican congressman, Mark Kirk, swiftly rejected my request that he call for a vote. He, like many others, did not want to go on record voting against a measure that garnered such widespread public support, so he silently let the ban expire. It's now left to the states to enact their own assault weapons bans. One such measure, House Bill 2414, is pending in Springfield and despite strong support from police departments across the state, predictably faces NRA opposition. I can't make gun makers act responsibly and stop selling weapons designed for war to a mass market. I can't stop gangbangers from making the heinous choice to take human life. But I can vote out of office lawmakers who callously let these weapons back on our streets. *Jeanne Bishop Winnetka*
- Kirk owes district a plan to end Iraq war
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Kirk owes district a plan to end Iraq war Most major media corporations, companies, dime stores, fast food restaurants, and families would take pause at unchecked spending that fails to bring positive results. Most companies would require a receipt before reimbursing $72.40 to an employee who ran out to OfficeMax for supplies. Most folks wouldn�t leave the Whole Foods checkout line without a receipt. Yet, last week, when President Bush asked Congress for an emergency $72.4 billion for the Iraq war, there was little media coverage and little comment or questioning from anybody. The request was made in what is called Defense Supplemental Bill No. 6. It will be up for a vote in just a few days. Our 10th District Representative, Mark Kirk will surely vote for this �emergency spending� without comment or question. In the unlikely event he is actually questioned about his vote, he�ll claim he�s supporting the soldiers, even though our soldiers are more in harm�s way than ever as civil war in Iraq is now a fact with � as the Washington Post now reports, not the early reported 100 dead, but 1,300 Iraqi dead in the surge caused by the bombing of a Shiite Muslim shrine � and our US death toll continues to rise as well, without any positive results to show for all the waste, death, and dismantling of our beloved constitutional democracy. The people of this district are entitled to more than empty clich�s of �Support the Troops,� �Stay the Course,� and �9/11.� We need to demand Kirk bring the people of the 10th District a plan for ending this war with some benefit to the Iraqi people, reducing terrorism around the world and how exactly this additional money will be used toward those ends and those ends alone. *Ellen Beth Gill Deerfield*
- Kirk votes don
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* Mark Kirk came to Winnetka on Nov. 11 and gave a speech thanking veterans for their service to our country. Kirk's speech was ironic, because over the last eight months, Kirk has had four opportunities to vote for increased health and financial benefits for veterans. Each time, he voted against these benefits which could have helped veterans of the Iraq war face the future (including Iraq veterans from Kirk's own district). If there is one thing all Americans can agree on about Iraq, it is that the war there has been much more dangerous and life-threatening to our soldiers than we ever imagined. The war has required a huge commitment from our National Guard, members of which have taken heavy casualties, both in terms of death and injury, and reductions in income caused by leaving their regular jobs to fight the war. Certain members of Congress have recognized that National Guard Veterans need financial help to cope with the after-effects of the war, and have proposed amendments to various bills (HR 1268, S 256, HR 1815, and HR 2528) over the past eight months. These amendments have sought to provide financial help to these Iraq veterans who sorely need it. Kirk voted against this financial help every time. Kirk had the chance to provide financial help (and thanks) to veterans by voting yes on these amendments and he did not. Why didn't Kirk thank veterans then? *W. Kent Wilson Glenview*
- Kirk out of touch with his district
*Publisher: Winnetka Talk* U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, R-10th, of Highland Park, has always promoted himself as a friend of military veterans. But the September 2005 issue of NARFE, the publication for Retired and Current Federal Employees, reported that last year the House soundly defeated amendments prepared by Reps. Hensarling, R-Texas, and Mark Kirk to a budget procedure bill that would have made both federal and military retirement funds vulnerable to the automatic cuts in any year spending caps were exceeded. Now lets have a look at the present. This year, Kirk teamed up with House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and colleagues who are reportedly drafting a new budget enforcement bill that would cap entitlement spending including economic and health security promised to federal annuitants and military retirees. Medicaid, farm subsidied, food stamps and the Pension Benefits Corporation would also be vulnerable to cuts. So, all the publicity pictures Kirk takes with veterans in our local area for local newspapers are just window dressing to make himself look good. George J. Rosenblit Highland Park
- Troops not getting support they need
*Publisher: Daily Herald* U.S. soldiers have contacted dysentery and other water-borne diseases. I would like to say that if some congressmen have issues regarding meeting the basic needs and support that our troops need in the frontlines; they have to support to bring them back to our country from wherever they are engaged in battle. First the troops lacked armor and still there are some problems with the delivery of the newer version. Now they lack clean water. As much as 80% of our troops lack clean water. Imagine that they are fighting for our country and Conservatives like Mark Kirk opposed a measure that would have provided clean drinking water to our troops. For this lack of clean water, a large number of U.S. soldiers have contacted dysentery and other water-borne diseases. Conservatives like Mark Kirk, argued that transferring reconstruction money into other areas would undermine the reconstruction effort for Iraq and Afghanistan. How about undermining our own troop's health and morale? Looks as if these days, it's better to be in the reconstruction bill for Iraq and Afghanistan reconstruction, ($87 billion that looks untouchable), than to be in the amendment that supported our troops needed budget of $15 million for clean water that was voted down by our congressman Kirk. Please, Mr. Kirk, remember, I am sure your constituents would want you to support the needs of all of our soldiers, the ones in battle now as well as the ones who have returned, and you have failed to do so. *Del Parra Libertyville*
- The War and Kirk
*Publisher: Daily Herald* Back just before the beginning of the Iraq War, I wrote a letter to Congressman Mark Kirk expressing concern that we were marching to war in Iraq too quickly and too lightly. Mr. Kirk responded that he knew far better than I the reasons for war and listed WMD he knew were present. As it turns out, there were no such WMD. Perhaps Mr. Kirk simply believed the doctored Bush Administration intelligence, but he seemed so personally certain. Now, the war rages on with 1820 dead and several troops coming home with an infection that is resistant to antibiotics. The troops need our help, but Mr. Kirk is less certain about that. In the last session, Kirk votes twice against support for our troops. He voted against an amendment to National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 that would have expanded access to the military's TRICARE health insurance program to all reservist and National Guard members for a low fee (Roll Call No. 221). Then, Mr. Kirk voted Against an amendment to the Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2006 which would have added veterans health care funding for combat-related trauma care to support wounded troops returning to their homes, including medical and prosthetic research. (Roll Call No. 224). As a veteran and one with an intelligence background, I am surprised that after sending troops to war with bad intelligence, Kirk won�t pull out all the stops to support them. Ellen Beth Gill
- Kirk a no show for housing meeting
*Publisher: Deerfield Review* A public meeting is scheduled to talk about concerns with housing at Fort Sheridan, and Congressman Mark Kirk doesn't show up. Why should anyone be surprised? Congressman Kirk has been the invisible man since he got elected in 2000. Yes, he shows up to honor students, to hand out checks for government projects, and to walk in parades. He will show up for events that are very narrow in focus and have a select invitation-only audience, such as his recent meeting with police department administrators. All are important parts of being a congressman. But if any event has the slightest whiff of controversy, Kirk is nowhere to be found. We are currently facing a multitude of important issues in our district. Without inviting input from his constituents, in open forums, with room for all opinions to be expressed, and explanations from Kirk as to why he takes the positions he takes, how are we to work towards resolution and have our voices heard? We need the opportunity to voice ou concerns to a congressman who understands how vital this it to the representation of our district. I don't expect a congressman to always agree with me, but I do expect him to want my opinions, and have the courage to explain why he doesn't agree. By not showing up to talk about controversial issues, Mark Kirk is not doing his job. Sharon Narrod Highland Park
- Why did Kirk wait to tackle gang threat?
*Publisher: Daily Herald* On June 21, Mark Kirk told a �summit of law enforcement and government officials� in Deerfield that �combating the changing nature of gang activity in the suburbs will require new strategies.� The Daily Herald reported that there are more than 3,000 gang members north of Lake-Cook Road. Where was Kirk when the threat of gangs in the suburbs was in its infancy? Where was the federal government with the help it now recognizes is needed for local law enforcement to combat this threat? I have been a Lake County resident since 1987 and was a suburban high school teacher since the mid-1970s. The gang threat has been apparent for far longer than anyone cares to admit. During my tenure as a teacher, I attended briefings conducted by local police to inform us, to help us recognize what is a gang member. We were shown hand gestures, shoelace colors, shirt emblems and so on. It helped us for many years to combat gang activity in the high school. Our 10th Congressional District congressman, Mark Kirk, has been out of touch with his district. It is apparent that he has not been out on the streets, out in the neighborhoods of Buffalo Grove, Arlington Heights, North Chicago, Waukegan or other areas of the 10th Congressional District. Why has he not held meetings with high school and middle school kids to find out what has been happening on his watch? Why now? Why has he waited so long to take action? Perhaps Kirk would like to explain why our children take a back seat? *Steven Rosenzweig - Buffalo Grove*
- Where is Kirk on DeLay ethics?
*Publisher: Chicago Tribune* When the Chicago Tribune and the Wall Street Journal strongly question a Republican's fitness, you know that politician must have crossed the line long ago. Recently, both newspapers, along with many prominent Republicans, have spoken out against Tom DeLay's constant stream of ethical missteps. Meanwhile, we in the 10th district have heard nothing on this subject from our representative, Mark Kirk. Kirk's track record lately, on this and several other issues including social security, has been that of avoidance. Kirk prefers to hold press conferences and attach his name to legislation, both of which get his name in the media, without doing any real work in support of his constituents. He won't even meet with state legislators to discuss local issues which impact the 10th district voters, such as military housing. And he has refused, time and again, to hold town meetings to discuss the issues. When he first ran for office, Kirk vowed to be like John Porter - independent and accessible. He has been neither. His recent votes, including those on the Schiavo case and the bankruptcy bill, were in lockstep with the administration and against the best interests of his highly independent district, which by the way, voted for John Kerry last November. As Kirk's constituents, we have a right to know where he stands. As our representative, he has an obligation to inform us, listen to us, and truly represent our views and interests to Congress. If he fails, we need to hold him accountable. *Nancy Pred - Winnetka*
- Where is Outrage Over DeLay Ethics
*Publisher: Chicago Tribune* I write to ask you to ask U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk - where is the outrage against Republican Majority leader Tom DeLay. The greatness of the 10th Congressional District lies in our heritage of independence and our insistence on higher standards for public servants. As our representative, Mark Kirk needs to use his office to demand that our tax dollars are spent judiciously and with integrity. He needs to listen to the concerns of the 10th district where moderation and respect are among the most important values. Most of all, he needs to take his cue on national matters from his constituents. It is time for Kirk to help us fight the greed and corruption now entrenched in the Republican leadership. The health and wealth of our nation demand that we hold those who would turn public good into private gain accountable for their actions. Kirk is in the perfect position to speak for us - where is his voice? *Anne Wedner - Winnetka*
- Right or Moderate?
*Publisher: Chicago Tribune* December 2004 We were struck by the two separate stories in which Rep. Mark Kirk, R- 10th, was prominently mentioned last week. In the Nov,25 issue, was a story headlined "Kirk will head moderate House Republican bloc," which sounds promising since the Republican Party has been taken over by a group of radical, not conservatives. However, in your feature report "How area lawmakers voted," we find Kirk reportedly joining such right wing colleagues as Phil Crane, Henry Hyde and Dennis Hastert in two votes on S 2986, a measure to raise the debt ceiling. Kirk voted "yes" in lockstep with virtually the entire Illinois Republican delegation. Then, on an Democratic amendment to the same bill which asked that the Congress be given until April 15 to "restore the pay-as-you-go discipline to federal budgeting," Kirk, again in concert with his colleagues, voted "no". Is this the kind of moderation involving fiscal responsibility which we can expect from Kirk? We think it's extremely important for people here and in every congressional district to watch carefully what their representatives do. It's one thing to claim moderation; quite another to have one's actions belie one's words. *Anita Miller / Jordan Miller - Glencoe*