In Saturday’s Chicago Sun-Times, conservative columnist Thomas Roeser describes - quite convincingly - Sen. Durbin’s political vulnerability. He cites a St. Louis poll taken BEFORE the senator’s “Gitmo explosion” that had his approval rating at 50% and unfavorable rating at 34%. Here’s Roeser’s golden explanation of Durbin’s political situation:
” At least five anti-Durbin TV commercials come to mind. First, the tape of Durbin’s outlandish attack on U.S. guards at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility. Then there’s the tape of Mayor Daley excoriating Durbin as a disgrace. (This could prove to be the slam dunk. White, blue-collar Chicago Democrats listen to Mayor Daley. If he thinks Durbin is a disgrace, then they do too). Third, Durbin standing before the Senate in trembling apology, his voice quavering. Fourth, the Robert Novak column saying that fear of Daley drove Durbin to apologize. Fifth, Durbin using the tired Abe Lincoln shot-in-the-temple story that was old when Abe Marovitz first used it in the 1930s, which outraged Lincoln-loving Illinoisans. Sixth — aw, you get the idea.
These anti-Durbin commercials would contain enough strychnine to kill a horse. In all history, what would I compare Durbin and his Gitmo speech to? Sen. Ernest Lundeen of the Farmer-Labor Party in Minnesota, who in the 1930s said Hitler had some good points. Or Rep. Paul Findley (R-Ill.), who declared himself Yasser Arafat’s best friend in Congress (which Durbin used to defeat him). Lundeen and Findley’s talks weren’t on tape. Durbin’s crying tape alone seemingly ran 24/7 across the nation.”

Now I agree with Roeser that Durbin can be defeated in 2008, but I don’t know that the man to do it is Rep. John Shimkus (as Roeser suggests). Shimkus is a congressman from downstate Illinois, and from what I have read, he is not a solid conservative (correct me if I’m wrong Alex). Apparently, he supported a bill that linked the Bush tax cuts to an increase in the minimum wage and also supported tariffs on imported steel. Roeser says he has a record of “bipartisan cooperation in the House” (always suspect in my book). Still, this man is an Army Ranger, a former high school teacher, and currently an Army reservist. Can you imagine an Army Ranger confronting Durbin and his elitist, know-it-all attitude in a debate about GITMO, Abu Ghraib… Now that’s something I would love to see. It might go something like this: “Sen. Durbin why do you reflexively assume the worst about our brave soldiers, while giving our enemies a free pass?” or “Senator, I have served in the Army my entire life, and the gulag we are not. At the very least, Illinois needs a leader who recognizes good from evil, and won’t smear those who do freedom’s work.” If he plays his hand right, this could be a devastating rhetorical attack. Shimkus probably isn’t the perfect conservative, but he may be just the man the Illinois GOP needs to take out one of the Senate’s most vociferous and bombastic liberals, and, in the process, revitalize our state party for years to come.