From Roll Call:
Asked if he was considering a run to replace [Senator Kyl], Flake – a vehemently anti-earmark conservative Republican acknowledged that he was but would say little more.
“This is Kyl’s day, but we’ll have an announcement soon enough,” he said.
More here.
This would be splendid news if we can get Flake in the Senate to counterbalance McCain.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHe needs to answer for his vote to repeal DADT.
Some Arizonans on another thread have a list of things he needs to answer for, so that is apparently only his most recent negative. I'm not denying that he also has positives.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGreat...we get to replace Kyl, who has shown signs of conservative good sense on immigration reform with his effort to end extended family chain migration, with Flake who is a big supporter of amnesty and unending mass legal immigration.
So on immigration at least he would be no counterbalance to McCain. He'd be just as bad or worse.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI really don't give a darn about DADT. I want to know how he will vote on repealing Obamacare, limiting the federal government, returning power to the people, cutting spending, cutting taxes and regulation, confirming conservative judges (and opposing liberal judges), and generally fighting for the ongoing survival of our Republican. Gays in the military ranks about 8,000 or so on my list of cares.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusegullyborg, as I recall you care deeply about DADT. You were an insistent and ubiquitous advocate for its repeal. How can you say otherwise?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI have strong opinions about a lot of things, many of which have no bearing on whether I think a person should be a Senator or not. On the issue of DADT, my strong opinion was go ahead and repeal it. But this does not mean I think DADT, for or against, is something that should be a big issue for a candidate for Senate in 2012. The big issues are what I listed.
When DADT comes up, then I am happy to offer a strong opinion on it. But until it comes up again, I have no vested interest in making it an issue.
Rome is burning and the barbarians are at the gate. Now is not the time to debate the merits of the bath house.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course you have no interest in arguing about it now that you have what you wanted. It is disingenuous, though, to contend that DADT is an issue beneath our notice after you spent so much time noticing it, and after your side won. Naturally, now you would like for the issue never to be revisited.
We will see the results of repeal in time, and we will meanwhile take note of the Republican politicians who voted for repeal.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse