See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. Crap and Traitor Mark Kirk out of Illinois Senate race – or is he? | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
2. Jeremiah Films
3. Applause: Contacting Senators about Cap-and-Trade Travesty Paying Off: Global Warming Hoax Tax Vote Put on Hold « Frugal Café Blog Zone
4. Just How Bad Is the HR 2454 Energy Tax Bill? Greenpeace Won’t Back It « Frugal Café Blog Zone
5. Polar Bear Numbers Surge to 50-Year High, Obama’s Approval Rating Plunges to New Dismal Low « Frugal Café Blog Zone
6. John Boehner: Champion for Americans, Reads Aloud the Shocking Additions to the Global Warming Tax Increase Bill « Frugal Café Blog Zone
7. Cap And Tax 8 » Blog Archive » One Down, Seven To Go?
8. Speedlinking Some Morale Builders :: YankMcCain.com
9. One Down, « The Recreant Right
10. Kirk In, Kirk Out…Who Knows? | Conservative Political Report
11. Cap and Tax Eight ALONE Could Be Responsible for 500,000 Jobs Losses : Excellence In America
12. How cap and trade costs jobs « The TRUE Cost of "Cap and Trade"
13. Op-Ed Cartoons: Al Gore’s Global Warming Scam « Frugal Café Blog Zone
14. Michelle Malkin » Groan: Cap-and-tax 8′er Mark Kirk will run for Senate
15. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Inevitable: GOP Senate candidate applies for Palin endorsement

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #742276
   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:39 pm, Misscheryl said:

   1 down…7 to go.

2. #742282
   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:44 pm, rambler said:

   The next thing is to have him out of the House as well. May the rest of them fall as well.

3. #742283
   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:45 pm, rightwingmom said:

   Keep up the good work!

   We CAN make a difference.

4. #742284
   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:45 pm, cheapseat said:

   don’t let the door….

5. #742288
   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:47 pm, Paul Revere said:

   Tahehe

6. #742297
   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:57 pm, madmonkphotog said:

   On July 10th, 2009 at 4:39 pm, Misscheryl said:
   1 down…7 534 to go.

   I made a slight correction for you.

7. #742305
   On July 10th, 2009 at 5:01 pm, Flyoverman said:

   Buh bye…….

   Now let’s find a solid, vetted conservative to run. No another Alan Keys. I appreciate his values, but he’s a political disaster.

8. #742313
   On July 10th, 2009 at 5:07 pm, Misscheryl said:

   Update: He’s still waffling: “Kirk Says He’s Still Mulling Senate Race.”

   This is so typical of these pantywaists.

9. #742318
   On July 10th, 2009 at 5:12 pm, Rekd said:

   That’s good news. I’m sure it will get the attention of the rest of the turds republicans

10. #742324
    On July 10th, 2009 at 5:21 pm, Socky said:

    The Democrats offered $3.5 Billion in taxpayer’s money to flip one Democrat vote on Cap and Trade. I wonder how much Kirk got and if he feels cheated.

11. #742356
    On July 10th, 2009 at 5:58 pm, Papa Louie said:

    …his colleagues refused to back Kirk in a primary against Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna due, in large part, to his vote in favor of President Barack Obama’s climate change bill.

    It’s so nice to see that the Cap and Trade bill is already having such an affect on the climate – the political climate that is. The political prospects for Cap’n Kirk and the Traders have cooled considerably since the House passed the bill.

12. #742366
    On July 10th, 2009 at 6:03 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

    Those phone calls, e-mails, faxes and Tea Parties sure beat the heck out of bumper sticker campaigns!

13. #742379
    On July 10th, 2009 at 6:12 pm, bradley said:

    He didn’t have a chance anyway. That “seat” in the Senate is a “black seat” and belongs permanently to some corruptocrat from Chicago’s South Side.
    Too bad Rev. Wright isn’t running, he’d likely win big time. Oh, yeah. Thttttt.

14. #742426
    On July 10th, 2009 at 7:31 pm, hunter said:

    …his colleagues refused to back Kirk in a primary against Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna due, in large part, to his vote in favor of President Barack Obama’s climate change bill.

    Now they must refuse to back him if he runs as the incumbent for the House.

15. #742441
    On July 10th, 2009 at 7:56 pm, Pasadena Phil said:

    …his colleagues refused to back Kirk in a primary against Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna due, in large part, to his vote in favor of President Barack Obama’s maverick Senator John McCain’s climate change bill.

    If we could now replace the scoundrels who run the GOP, THAT would be something. Still this is good, it’s a start.

16. #742469
    On July 10th, 2009 at 9:08 pm, RobM1981 said:

    Good riddance to bad garbage.

    We need to electorally slap these 8 traitors around, relentlessly. No mercy, no quarter, and no stopping. They are traitors to their districts, to actual science, and to anything approaching “conservative” values.

    No prisoners.

17. #742470
    On July 10th, 2009 at 9:09 pm, RobM1981 said:

    And, Phil, I’m with you. McCain should be run out on a rail.

18. #742486
    On July 10th, 2009 at 9:29 pm, sandspur said:

    Here is Rep Lance’s email to me regarding Cap and Tax:

    Thank you for contacting me in opposition to H.R. 2454, the “American Clean Energy and Security Act.” I appreciate your taking the time to share your views with me.

    I voted in favor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act because the legislation greatly benefits New Jersey. The measure also moves us closer to a national energy policy that reduces our dependence on foreign oil, ensures our national security and leads to a path toward cleaner energy.

    BENEFITS FOR NEW JERSEY:

    “New Jersey would be a big winner under cap and trade, because emission standards here already are very stringent, allowing state firms meeting them to sell carbon or ‘pollution’ credits to others out of state.” (Daily Record, July 8, 2009)

    Much of my support for the energy bill stemmed from the fact that New Jersey greatly benefits under the legislation.

    New Jersey does well under the bill because we have invested in new, clean energy technologies like nuclear power that have reduced greenhouse gas emissions and created thousands of jobs. In fact, businesses created more than 25,000 such energy-related jobs in New Jersey alone.

    According to the Star-Ledger, New Jersey is a “big winner” under the energy bill:

    “..[M]aps, produced by the GOP leadership, that showed the winners and losers among the states. New Jersey is a big winner.

    “One map shows that New Jersey ranks third behind only California and Washington state in a possible windfall from sale of allowances to other states — realizing $104 million.

    “The other map.shows New Jersey as one of only 10 states that would not face increased costs for products as a result of the effort to lower carbon emissions.” (Star-Ledger, July 6, 2009)

    The energy bill has been endorsed by a number of New Jersey’s leading businesses including PSE&G, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson and Petra Solar because they firmly believe the legislation would strengthen our state economy through innovative and sustainable job creation.

    Former New Jersey Governor Thomas H. Kean personally telephoned me to urge my support for the legislation. I was honored to have received Governor Kean’s request.

    You can find more information about how New Jersey benefits by visiting my congressional website lance.house.gov.

    LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD:

    New Jersey and the Northeast are well ahead of the curve on many of the key elements of the legislation before the House. ??

    Here at home, the state of New Jersey is already subject to limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants under the ten-state Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. And our state renewable portfolio standard is more aggressive than the federal program contained in the bill.

    I believe it is time for other states to follow New Jersey’s leadership and do their share to set limits on greenhouse gas emissions and accelerate development of low-carbon energy sources and green jobs. By leveling the national playing field New Jersey businesses and consumers will benefit by playing under the same rules as those in other states.

    Also, our air quality will improve as other states, such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, move toward low-carbon energy sources.

    COST:

    There has been much discussion about the cost of the energy bill should it become law. While there have been both conservative and liberal analyses of the bill, I relied upon the following cost-estimates.

    First, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration suggested New Jersey residents might see less than a $50 increase in 10 years, owing to the fact that the state already has similar regulations in place.

    Second, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated nationally people would expect to see a $175 increase in annual energy costs by 2020. This is a national average over the next decade. New Jersey would not even see this level of increase because we already rely heavily on clean energy technology.

    After reviewing these two non-partisan estimates, I concluded that the costs to New Jersey’s citizens would be minimal and the benefits great.

    MISPERCEPTIONS OF THE ENERGY BILL

    I have heard from a number of misperceptions about the energy bill.

    Claim: “The legislation will mandate home efficiency standards in which the government will come in and inspect a home before it can be sold.”

    New and existing houses and commercial buildings built prior to 2014 would not be affected by provisions in the energy bill.

    Claim: “There’s nothing in the bill for nuclear energy.”

    The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI.org) representing our nation’s nuclear industry wrote:

    “The nuclear energy industry welcomes the inclusion of provisions promoting greater use of clean-energy technologies, including nuclear energy, as part of the American Clean Energy and Security Act. House members are to be commended for including within H.R. 2454 provisions that will accelerate deployment of clean-energy technologies.

    “The legislation can help stimulate construction of the advanced-design nuclear power plants that our nation needs. These provisions can help mobilize private capital and facilitate debt financing on reasonable terms for the first wave of nuclear plant projects to help reduce uncertainties and ultimately lower the cost to consumers of the electricity produced by these new energy facilities.” (NEI press release, June 26, 2009)

    Claim: “The energy bill will add to our already growing national debt.”

    The energy bill adds nothing to our national debt. In fact, the legislation covers its own costs and actually brings in revenue for consumers through rebates and tax credits as well as to invest in more clean energy and energy efficiency innovation.

    MY FISCAL RECORD:

    For my part, I am proud of my fiscally conservative record in Congress.

    I am working hard to stop out-of-control spending and borrowing mandated by the federal stimulus, the congressional budget and the 9,000-earmark omnibus appropriation bill – all measures that I opposed on the floor of the House of Representatives.

    Soon the Congress will turn to healthcare where I am firmly opposed to a single-payer public option. Instead, I am taking a leading in crafting a fiscally responsible health care reform alternative.

    A few of my fiscally responsible votes include:
    o Voting against the $1 trillion stimulus package;

    o Voting against President Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget plan;

    o Voting against the $500 billion omnibus spending bill;

    o Voting against this spring’s $350 billion TARP bailout legislation;

    o Voted against the $106 billion war supplemental measure that included billions of dollars for the International Monetary Fund;

    o Voting to cut billions of dollars in wasteful and duplicative government spending; and

    o Voting against raising the federal debt ceiling from $9.815 trillion to $10.615 trillion – an $800 billion increase.

    IN CONCLUSION:

    After careful analysis, including reading the bill and listening to the floor debate on the subsequent 300-page amendment, it is my strong view that my vote in support of the energy bill was cast with New Jersey’s best interests in mind and is consistent with my long-standing record of fiscal and environmental responsibility.

    Best personal wishes.

    Sincerely,
    Leonard Lance
    Member of Congress

19. #742494
    On July 10th, 2009 at 9:37 pm, Ron said:

    Not only should he not run for Burris’s seat, a conservative Republican ought to run against him in the GOP primary next year if he decides he wants to keep his seat.

20. #742567
    On July 10th, 2009 at 11:19 pm, Vntnrse said:

    I just left voice mail on the Rockford Office phone line of Congressman Don Manzullo, thanking him “just in case he was one of the conservative reps that advised that RINO Congressman Kirk” that they would not support him. Don Manzullo is the rep that covers the district that my mother lives in. I was polite, but I was also forceful and told them that I was calling from San Diego and wanted to leave Cong. Manzullo a “big thank you”

21. #742679
    On July 11th, 2009 at 8:50 am, RobM1981 said:

    Dear Lenny Lance,

    So are you saying that it’s OK for the government to start coming into houses built after 2014? Is that what you are saying? Jackboots are fine, five years from now?

    And when, btw, has NJ last built a nuclear plant? Do you remember that one that Marrill Creek Reservoir was built to cool? We’re still waiting.

    And those “strict environmental laws” you mention are the reason why industry has FLED New Jersey.

    So, the question is: what was in it for you, personally? Because for both New Jersey AND the nation, this legislation absolutely stinks on ice.

22. #742735
    On July 11th, 2009 at 11:38 am, dtestard said:

    On July 10th, 2009 at 4:57 pm, madmonkphotog said:

    I made a slight correction for you.

    Sometimes a perfectionist comes in very handy!!

23. #742738
    On July 11th, 2009 at 11:46 am, dtestard said:

    On July 10th, 2009 at 9:29 pm, sandspur said:

    Here is Rep Lance’s email to me regarding Cap and Tax:

    One map shows that New Jersey ranks third behind only California and Washington state in a possible windfall from sale of allowances to other states — realizing $104 million.

    And where does this windfall for your State come from, Congressman Lance? The working people of the other states, Congressman??

    It looks like Congressman Lance has voted to screw the working people in the other 49 states of the Republic. I question his patriotism, his ethics (he was obviously bought), and his fitness to serve.

    Total Recall.

24. #742822
    On July 11th, 2009 at 2:36 pm, redgrandma said:

    # 18 Sandspur…

    At least you received a response from Congresscreature Lance. I sent a hand delivered letter to Mark Kirk and I am still waiting.

25. #742966
    On July 11th, 2009 at 7:58 pm, puhiawa said:

    He’ll beg for support then stab the country in the back again. He is a Specter.

26. #743975
    On July 13th, 2009 at 2:28 pm, DagneyT said:

    I phoned. His office is not staffed with any sort of brainiacs. The moron who answered sounded so dazed, he didn’t even answer with his bosses name!