Why does Mark Kirk love charts so much?

The two candidates duking out a personal battle for Obama’s old Senate seat — Democratic State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias and five-term Republican Congressman Mark Kirk — took their beefs to the set of Meet the Press this morning.

Sitting in the D.C. studio, the two candidates spoke nary a word before the segment and twiddled their thumbs. A montage played as they waited, two men who have lobbed plenty of unkind words at each other from a distance suddenly sitting a few inches apart. On the video, a woman summed up the race thus: Illinois voters have a choice between a serial embellisher (Kirk) and a mob banker (Giannoulias). And though the first half of the debate was devoted to policy, it was arguments over those epithets that were at the heart of the match-up.

They started by speaking about Obama’s legacy. Giannoulias said that we should give the guy a break given what a nasty hand he had coming into office. Kirk lifted up a GDP-to-debt ratio chart he had brought, for just such an occasion, to show that while, sure, things were bad when Bush left, Obama had only made the economy worse.

The talking points were pretty standard Republican and Democrat stances. Kirk said the stimulus had failed. Giannoulias said he’d support more stimulus. Both championed the needs of small businesses, either in terms of access to capital or getting stimulus-provided tax cuts. Both invoked the fear of China — and, in Kirk’s case, the fear that we’re heading toward a European style of government — that Joe Klein highlighted in his recent cover story on the feelings of the American electorate. And both suggested that whatever the other guy wanted to do would surely make us a lap dog to the Far East.

Host David Gregory spent more time on Kirk during this half, targeting him for backing tax cuts that can’t be paid for and forcing him to answer for all Republicans but also giving him more time to lay out his policies, to explain why he wants to repeal health care legislation and replace it with his own bill. (The big problem being that Kirk would have to decimate the good provisions that Giannoulias highlighted, like allowing kids to stay on their parents policies until they’re 26, in order to wipe the slate clean and replace it with his more limited-scope plan.)

Then came the second half everyone was waiting for. In the post-debate analysis, our own Joe Klein and the Wall Street Journal‘s Peggy Noonan both lamented how this race is so concentrated on accusations about personal character when people are so full of anxiety about problems that are unrelated to Kirk’s exaggerated claims about his military service and Giannoulias’ bank ties to “the mob.” But even if that’s not what people care about, it’s what they like to read about, and, of course, it made for the best television of the day.

The two candidates took the two different roads a politician can when faced with scandal. When asked about his family’s bank lending to known members of the mafia, Giannoulias hedged his response by saying they didn’t know the “extent” of the criminal activity, hinting at the idea that it’s not a financial institution’s job to decide who’s the next John Gotti (as a financial journalist on set put it). Kirk owned up to his misrepresentations of awards and whether he was under fire while serving tours abroad. He said it was careless but never answered Gregory’s pressing about how someone gets so careless about those sorts of details. Kirk said, unsatisfyingly, that it was “confusing.” (He also brought another visual aid to show the highlighted names of questionable persons Giannoulias had lent money too, while the latter had to defend himself with slappers only. In a scrum after the debate, one reporter asked what had to be the most hilariously vapid question of the day: Why does Kirk love charts so much? Giannoulias declined to speculate.)

After the debate ended with no clear winner, a Giannoulias aide tole TIME that Kirk is stuck. He can’t run against Washington because he’s long been established there, he said. He can’t run against Obama because no matter what the polls look like, he’ll still be Illinois’ boy. And he can’t run on personal attacks because of his own gaffes. But the latter point doesn’t hold up. Of course he can, and the two will continue to trade those hits for these final days before the election.

A commercial played during one of the breaks wherein a man shoveling in a hole symbolizes America shoveling itself into debt and the voiceover says, “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” And it seemed a funny reminder that stopping is exactly what these guys can’t — or at least won’t — do, no matter what shape the race takes. They can only shovel in another direction.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of  a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty number two), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay marriage advocates—as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • newfreedomblog

    Mark Kirk or Alexi Giannoulias, no matter how you slice or dice it both are not good choices for candidates at all.
    .
    Just another race of many where we as the voter get to decide between the better of two evils.
    .
    We then go home and shower after voting.

  • newfreedomblog

    More depressing news…
    .
    http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/2128-us-wont-recover-lost-jobs-until-march-2020-at-current-pace
    .
    U.S. Won’t Recover Lost Jobs Until March 2020 At Current Pace

  • allthingsinaname

    I’ll be damned! We agree!

  • newfreedomblog

    The coming “wave” election. History again repeats itself.
    .
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657304575540300424055286.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond
    .
    Not since 1854 have we seen this level of distrust in government, anger from the people / voters, and the potential of one party to bury another.

  • newfreedomblog

    Hang in there allthings. I am betting we agree on more things than we disagree with each other. :)
    .
    Also I’d like to thank Katy for being judiciously more fair in her coverage of both of these candidates. She equally gave both poor reports. Perhaps we are even having an affect on TIME.com reporters.
    .
    Imagine that!!

  • newfreedomblog

    In other news,

    “House Republicans’ No. 2 leader, Eric Cantor of Virginia, says he repudiates Iott’s actions and would not support someone who would do that.”

    .
    Cantor was speaking of Rich Iott who participated in WWII “reenactments”.
    .
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gop-leader-slams-candidate-for-nazi-uniform-pics/nazi/

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    There should be a rule that states that anytime the phrase “the stimulus failed” appears in a news story, a brief 2 sentence description of what would have happened without the stimulus should immediately follow. Otherwise the author of the story can be correctly described as spreading lies.

  • newfreedomblog

    Stooping to all time new lows. DNCC Ad
    .

  • afguy

    Better candidates across the board, please.
    .
    I’d LOVE to have BOTH R and D candidates that I could reasonably see myself voting for because of their positions or characters, NOT in spite of them.
    .
    Wouldn’t it be great if, after a vote for a position at the national level, we DIDN’T feel the need to shower, scrub, or remove the clothes pins from our nostrils?

  • Paul-no not that one

    I don’t feel that way very often.
    .
    Two years ago I felt fine after voting for my Congressman (Ellison), my Senator (Franken) and the President.
    .
    There are times when the choices stink but those times are the exception.
    .
    Having said that, from what little I have followed the Il. race, they do look like a couple of stinkers.

  • 3xfire3

    Newfreedom,
    .
    “Stooping to all time new lows. DNCC Ad.”
    .
    For the National DNCC to run an AD this dishonest is unbelievable. One may realize this happens with local politicians running ADs that are lies and/or unsubstantiated accusations but you would not expect the National committee to sink that low.
    .
    There is no absolutely no proof of any use by the CC of Foreign money for political advertising. At this point it is only an unsubstantiated accusation that the DNCC is using to try to demonize republicans and the CC.
    .
    I noticed that even President Obama has made this same accusation.
    .

  • Paul-no not that one

    You both refer to the “DNCC” (well one of you calls them the “National DNCC” and then refers to the “CC” a couple of times), what does that stand for?
    .
    I figured The Physician just made a mistake/typo but when you both use it it makes me curious.

  • apr2563

    OT: But, I want to ask the right wing commentators on this site what they would have to say if one of the “liberal” Supreme Court’s spouses headed up a political “non-profit” that does not reveal its contributors and called a Republican president a tyrant. This is after your judicial spouse voted to make sure contributions of that type could be held secret.
    .
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/09/virginia-thomas-clarence-_n_756881.html
    .
    Conflict of interest much?

  • herby002

    6.2 – Paul,
    Democratic National Campaign Committee.
    (Which free, 3x et al would charge is brother-in-arms to the CCCP.)

  • Paul-no not that one

    But they are not the Democratic National Campaign Committee.
    .
    They are the Democratic National Committee.
    .
    As far as I can find there is no such thing as the DNCC.

  • freeinpa

    ” a brief 2 sentence description of what would have happened without the stimulus should immediately follow.”
    .
    .
    Oh please, please tell us what “would” have happened because you clearly know or you are convinced you think you know. Speaking of lies!

  • freeinpa

    “Supreme Court’s spouses headed up a political “non-profit” that does not reveal its contributors and called a Republican president a tyrant.”
    .
    Please provide a list of jobs you and the left find appropriate. I assume you had the same issues with Hillary being offered a job at a law firm that was the recipient of the state of Arkansas business or Michele Obama being given a hospital administrator job (receiving state funding) for which she had no qualification after Barack was elected or Linda Daschle lobbying Tom Daschle.
    .

    And exactly how is calling a Republican president a tyrant an issue? Or in addition to not being able to be employed you lose 1st Amendment protections as well.

  • freeinpa

    “Which free, 3x et al would charge is brother-in-arms to the CCCP”
    .

    Another statement without basis or fact but it it is never a detriment to the left.

  • spob

    “When asked about his family’s bank lending to known members of the mafia, Giannoulias hedged his response by saying they didn’t know the ‘extent’ of the criminal activity, hinting at the idea that it’s not a financial institution’s job to decide who’s the next John Gotti (as a financial journalist on set put it).”
    .
    Ms. Steinmetz, I get that this is a blog and that you’re not an expert in bank practices, but you could do a little better here.
    .
    First of all, from a hard-business sense, it’s a good idea for banks to be extremely cautious if lending tens of millions of dollars to companies controlled by people with the criminal records of Michael “Jaws” Giorango. Reason no. 1: these guys may not be exactly honest with the financial statements of the companies they run–thus the bank may be making a riskier loan than meets the eye. Reason no. 2: the bank, if on some notice of the criminal’s past may not be able to defeat any IRS tax liens that may get slapped on the property of the criminal—Giorango was involved in prostitution and loan sharking, two activities that suggest a probable lack of candor on tax returns. Doubtful a bank which is supposed to have rules about knowing their customers (Know-your-customer or KYC) and AML (anti-money laundering) practices in place would be able to defeat the IRS liens on property securing the indebtedness. Reason no. 3, the guy might wind up going back to jail, and good luck getting the loan repaid then.
    .
    Additionally, as I mentioned above, KYC/AML rules are supposed to prevent financial institutions (whose deposits are insured by FDIC, by the way) from getting into bed with these characters.
    .
    On top of that, how’d you like to be the loan officer dealing with “Jaws” Giorango? Would you ask tough questions about ongoing compliance with the loan documentation?
    .
    Finally, it cannot be forgotten that the Giannoulias family took out large dividends while they were making these huge loans to mobsters. Where’s that in your write-up Ms. Steinmetz.

    As an aside, I find it surpassing strange that Obama’s endorsement of Giannoulias isn’t discussed. Obama has spent years railing on banks and greed, yet he is supporting Giannoulias? Talk about utter and absolute hypocrisy. He and his family took millions out of that bank while lending millions to mobsters. Why does Obama get a pass?

  • Paul-no not that one

    You are so darn cute when you return!
    .
    Verbose–check
    .
    Assumed expertise on the topic–check
    .
    One sided interest on the topic–check
    .
    Gratuitous BHO connection to the topic–check

  • spob

    PNNTO, how is this verbose? Verbose implies unnecessary wordiness. I don’t think my post is that. It’s long.
    .
    Assumed expertise? Hmmm. Point to anything in the above post that is wrong.
    .
    One-sided interest? Gee, I thought your side was against the people who took millions from failing financial institutions before they were closed down. Guess the (D) cures all. Silly me, I thought you had at least some principles.
    .
    With respect to BHO? How in the world is it gratuitous? Obama endorsed this guy. Doesn’t that mean that Obama owns this guy’s actions? And it is beyond hypocritical for Obama to be railing against irresponsible fat cats yet supporting this guy–he lent money to a guy who ran a prostitution ring. Where’s NOW?

  • spob

    By the way, PNNTO, a lot of financial institutions, before they lend millions to companies, conduct background checks of key officers and equity holders.
    .
    Take off your clown suit.

  • spob

    And let’s see of Ms. Steinmetz can answer my points.

  • afguy

    Obama endorsed this guy. Doesn’t that mean that Obama owns this guy’s actions? And it is beyond hypocritical for Obama to be railing against irresponsible fat cats yet supporting this guy–he lent money to a guy who ran a prostitution ring.
    .
    So it’s your position that Obama must be pro-prostitution (or, actually, pro-anything) if he supported someone linked to that in some way?
    .
    An octopus would be envious of such a broad “reach”, spob!

  • herby002

    9.1 – Paul,

    You’re right. I was wrong.

    9.2 – free,

    I apologize. I’ll translate it for you: USSR.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

    A report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office shows the Recovery Act has increased the number of workers by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million. The CBO also projects that 3.7 million jobs could be attributed to the stimulus by the end of September.

    Two sentences. It’s not that hard……

  • spob

    afguy, did you take some stupid pills? Obama has endorsed this guy and raised money for him. How is it a reach to say that Obama should own him?
    .
    But even more to the point. Barack Obama has railed against fat cat bankers who got rich while running the economy into the ground–even going so far as to attack people who simply wanted to be paid what they contracted for (some of whom were completely blameless). But now, Obama will endorse a guy whose risky loans to known mobsters helped drive a federally-insured financial institution into the ground while he and his family took millions from said institution. How in the world that is not hypocrisy of the highest order is beyond me. But then again, I am not a Democrat.

  • afguy

    I can raise money for a candidate then find out he’s cheating on his wife.
    .
    Doesn’t mean I now support his adultery. Idiot.
    .
    But I DO recognize ODS when I see it.
    .
    Be very careful of your examples. Change the names of the companies and you could be describing a number of “R” politicians from previous administrations.

  • liberalmeltdown

    These two sound like the candidates we get in California. Dumb and dumber.
    .
    Neither will do what they say they will. Democrats will raise taxes and spend here. And Republicans will lie about raising your taxes and hide behind anti tax pledges. Then they go into the back room and roll over and get appointed Lieutenant Governor by Benedict Arnold.
    .
    A year later they come out campaigning against spending and taxes.
    .
    Rinse and repeat in the next election cycle until the state is bankrupt.

  • apr2563

    freeper: If you don’t understand the position the Supreme Court holds in our county, I can’t expect you to understand how tacky Ms Thomas is being. She certainly can stand on the Supreme Court steps and yell f**k you. Howver, it would not be considered very classy. Also, I do not approve of any political group that is not willing to name their specific donors.
    .
    Unlike you, I am not blinded to the Dem parties transgressions as you are to those on the right. Again, if this was a “liberal” judges spouse in this position you would be frothing at the mouth with invective.
    .
    I think political spouses who work for their husbands or wives or work for lobbyists is unacceptable and should not be allowed, no matter the party.

  • newfreedomblog

    The DNC is the Democratic National Committee. The mother of all things Democrat.
    .
    The DNCC is Democratic National Campaign Committee, a subordinate political arm of the “mother” committee.
    .
    As usual, liberals love to change the names of things to make it look like it is a different creature all together. In this case tho, I think they simply ran out of cute names to change it to.
    .
    It is sort of like calling someone a progressive, when in fact they are mainly liberals, and most are socialists. But, I would interchange all of the names as really one entity or person.
    .
    Does that help?

  • spob

    no afguy, it doesn’t mean he supports it, it just means that it’s not an issue to him, which means he has a certain tolerance, which IS bad, hence he owns it.
    .
    Of course, you can’t address the obvious hypocrisy angle here.
    .
    So who’s the idiot?

  • newfreedomblog

    Simply put april2563, the wife of the Supreme Court Justice, Ms Thomas is an individual, no?
    .
    Does she lose her rights once her spouse is selected to become one of the 9 other Justices?
    .
    Probably one of the most controversial positions a spouse may have and use it as some political tool is the First Lady. Most have used that position for the greater good of all people in this country. Some however have used it to further the political party from which their spouse was elected to the position of President.
    .
    Now in my mind, the President wields much more power than any single Justice. The President is considered to be the “Leader of the Free World”. In case you do not understand, that is even bigger than just being President of the United States.
    .
    So are you advocating we lock Michelle up in the basement of the White House and never let her out again until after Barack loses in 2012? I would be for that.

  • freeinpa

    You could say the moon is made of blue cheese it doesn’t make it a fact. How can it SHOW number of workers increased by 1.2 million-2.8 million, that’s a 133% range. Meaning they don’t know! 3..7 million at end of Sept.? Unemployment reports tell us different.

    It seems the CBO’s numbers are reliable as Obams”s economic advisers as the graph below shows unemployment based on selling the stimulus.
    .
    It’s not hard but it’s not correct either!

    shows the Recovery Act has increased the number of workers by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million. The CBO also projects that 3.7 million jobs could be attributed to the stimulus by the end of September.

    Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/10/10/why-does-mark-kirk-love-charts-so-much/?replytocom=208106#respond#ixzz123R4ElCT

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/10/graph_for_the_day_for_october_1.html

  • freeinpa

    ” She certainly can stand on the Supreme Court steps and yell f**k you. Howver, it would not be considered very classy”
    .
    Once again you use the yours is worst than ours but I will only complain about yours. Brown calls a women candidate a whore thr list goes on. But there is no sense pointing it out because if its a conservative its always worse…Because you say so!!!

  • freeinpa

    “I apologize. I’ll translate it for you: USSR.”
    .
    I understand what it means I did watch Wide World of Sports.

    You have no basis to say who I woudl say “is brothers in arms”. But then reality isn’t the lefts strong suit.

blog comments powered by Disqus