By Doug Ibendahl

I first want to thank and say congratulations to the Tea Party groups for hosting an incredibly successful gubernatorial candidate forum in Homer Glen on Wednesday night. The Chicago Tribune got it right - more than 1,000 attended. I can't remember the last time a GOP organization or campaign attracted so many people to an event in Illinois.

Of course the Tea Party movement is nonpartisan - and Wednesday night was no exception. The Democratic candidates for governor were also invited - but they declined, as did Republican candidates Andy McKenna and Jim Ryan.

The tea partiers are about issues - not party labels - but my sense is most would consider themselves Republicans if only the GOP would abide by its own conservative principles. It's up to Republican candidates to prove their worthiness. The tea party folks aren't going to pull the elephant lever automatically. They are looking for a meaningful alternative to big government Democrats.

Wednesday night was a lot of fun and the five Republican candidates in attendance mixed it up pretty well with each other. Bob Schillerstrom was probably the only real loser. As the lone opponent to concealed carry and the lone defender of abortion, Schillerstrom likely left with little new support from the mostly conservative attendees. But at least he was man enough to be there on stage - unlike the no-shows.

The other big loser was Andy McKenna. Each of the five rivals on stage Wednesday night got in some good digs at McKenna's expense - and each dig received the enthusiastic approval of the audience. I know I enjoyed it. It's encouraging to see how nearly every activist you talk to is up to speed on just how dreadful McKenna's record has been.

Of course the real test will be to see what these rivals do when McKenna is in the same room to defend himself.

Towards the end of the debate, Adam Andrzejewski took Kirk Dillard to task for endorsing Mark Kirk. As he said it, I could see Dillard trying to indicate with his body language that Adam was off the mark. (Basically Dillard waved his hands back and forth in a horizontal motion - the same way a baseball umpire would indicate a runner was "safe." Dillard clearly meant "stop" or "cut.")

On the one hand Adam's jab was unfair. Back in July we reported that Dillard made it clear that he had NOT endorsed Mark Kirk.

But on the other hand, on October 30th at the Milton Township Republican organization's Oktoberfest event, Mark Kirk muddied the waters again. Mark Kirk began his remarks by thanking the DuPage County Republicans who had endorsed him. Mark Kirk included Dillard in that list once again.

In Dillard's defense, he had already left the Oktoberfest by the time Mark Kirk spoke. And there is a reasonable question as to the duty one candidate has to set the record straight regarding what another says.

But I was disappointed that Dillard didn't speak up to clarify the issue once and for all on Wednesday night - especially since Andrzejewski had just fired a shot across the bow. The body language signal left things unclear to the audience. Dillard had an opportunity to set the record straight more clearly the next time he had the microphone - but he didn't.

That's why I personally asked Dillard about it right after the debate Wednesday night. Dillard reiterated everything he told me back in July. Dillard said he has NOT endorsed Mark Kirk.

I sense that Dillard doesn't want to create news that distracts from his own race. I can appreciate that. He's also no doubt hesitant to go out of his way to alienate any Mark Kirk voters. Dillard - like every candidate - has his own race to run and needs every vote he can get.

But as we saw Wednesday night, Dillard's rivals are going to continue to muddy the waters as long as Dillard avoids setting the record straight himself in a more public way. Andrzejewski's remarks clearly sowed more uncertainty with debate attendees who may not see this article.

I like Kirk Dillard personally, and he may think he has a better chance of winning by not stirring this particular pot with respect to Mark Kirk.

However, this is an important issue. Whether a candidate endorses Mark Kirk or not says a lot about a candidate.

The fact that Mark Kirk continues to tout phony endorsements should also be a huge issue for every Republican - especially for candidates like Dillard seeking a top leadership role. It's proof of Mark Kirk's blatant dishonesty and unfitness for promotion.

The use of made-up endorsements by Mark Kirk is especially sleazy given the way Kirk operatives recently tried to muddy-up a real endorsement that rival Patrick Hughes received from Coach Mike Ditka. After days of ginned-up confusion and "news stories" placed with friendly liberal journalists - everything eventually came back to square one, and the original truth. Mike Ditka had in fact endorsed Patrick Hughes - and the Coach stands by it.

Dillard says he has NOT endorsed Mark Kirk for U.S. Senate - and I believe him. I simply call on Dillard to say it loud and proud. And if in Mark Kirk we've got a U.S. Senate candidate this dishonest - then I do think Dillard has a duty to help let voters know. That's what a leader would do, and leadership is what voters are looking for this year more than ever.

Voters deserve to hear from Dillard himself on this endorsement issue - especially in light of the way Mark Kirk and others are continuing to sow confusion.

Doug Ibendahl is a Chicago Attorney and a former General Counsel of the Illinois Republican Party. He is Co-Founder of Republican Young Professionals (RYP).