Ali Hasan Endorses Ken Buck

(We’re always a big fan of third-person writing – promoted by Colorado Pols)

As a lifelong Republican who was born and raised here in Colorado, I am deeply proud to endorse Ken Buck for United States Senate and I encourage all Coloradans to vote for him.

My vote is based on two motivations – a voice for rural America and a need for fiscal conservatism.  

As a boy who grew up on our Western Slope in Eagle County, I feel it imperative that we send a rural voice to our United States Senate. Colorado’s three biggest economic forces are agriculture, energy, and tourism, all industries that are only found in our rural areas, ultimately proving that Denver is dependent on the Western & Eastern Slope, the San Luis Valley, and the Eastern Plains, not the inverse. Unfortunately, with severance taxes being diverted to Denver and talks to relocate Union Pacific rail tracks to our Eastern Plains, our rural areas have never been under greater attack.

In being from a rural area, as well as campaigning in every county, Ken Buck has demonstrated a sensitivity to our rural areas that will be needed in order to preserve the heritage of our West.

Secondly, in running for State Treasurer, I was proud to gain the endorsement of Douglas Bruce, as well as promoting the need for our State to divest from bailouts – in doing so, I stand proudly with Bruce and Jon Caldara, in becoming one of Colorado’s strongest fiscal conservatives. With that said, unlike Lt Governor Jane Norton, Ken Buck did not support Referendums C & D. More importantly, if we are to defeat the Democrats, we must do it with a candidate that doesn’t have to defend or apologize for Referendums C & D.

While Lt Governor Norton is quick to call for the repeal of Obamacare and the abolishment of governmental departments, such promises seem insincere without an apology for supporting Referendums C & D? After all, Norton’s current defense of C & D, coupled with her personal declarations of being a ‘Conservative,’ calls to question her ability to judge the difference between fiscal conservatism and fiscal liberalism.  

Let it be known that it was not the request of additional monies that made Referendum C an awful law, but rather, the fact that this request had no specified appropriations or requested monetary amount, ultimately becoming the biggest tax increase in Colorado’s history, with no accountability attached. In turn, from a viewpoint of strategy and principle, Ken Buck is the best choice.

Lastly, in traveling the campaign trail, I’ve gotten to know Ken and Perry Buck very well – they are genuine people, who love Colorado and truly want to represent Colorado well in the Senate – overall, I couldn’t think of a better person to support.

I’m proud to support Ken Buck for United States Senate and I ask all to vote for him! Please feel free to email me with any questions, as I’m always happy to vouch for Ken Buck.

Love and peace –

Ali Hasan


97 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Arvadonian says:

    advances your professed support of full equality for gays and lesbians how?

    • Pick the battles one by one

      Fiscal issues and a voice for rural Colorado is what matters most to me, at this time

      However – no way would I support Romanoff or Bennet – yes, they’re Democrats, but like the majority of the Democratic Party, both will PANDER heavily to the GLBT community, but both (again, like the Party) are too afraid to actually legislate real change

      I’ll go with Buck and his good character for now – it’s the best choice available

      • Arvadonian says:

        when civil rights for all will be a battle that you might actually decide is important enough to fight for?

        • But first we need candidates who are as committed to civil liberties for all, as we are as activists

          Romanoff and Bennet are not committed to advancing these civil liberties, as far as I’m concerned

          In turn, I’m forced to choose the candidate based on character and I choose Ken Buck

          • Arvadonian says:

            I asked for a time frame….

            Are there any Republican candidates that you have endorsed who have even made gay rights an issue (in a positive way)?  Romanoff has at least stated that he is in support of marriage equality.

          • Arvadonian says:

            Bennet has committed to vote for the repeal of DA/DT….where is Buck on these issues?

          • glasscup says:

            This is the same backwater extremist DA who got sued by the ACLU for seizing a bunch of people’s private tax returns indiscriminately.

            Civil liberties are the reason you’re backing Buck? Really?

            • bjwilson83 says:

              ILLEGAL immigrants. What do people not understand about the word “illegal”? It means not lawful, breaking the law, criminal. A good DA enforces the LAW.

              As far as civil liberties, Buck is probably the most libertarian (major) candidate in the race. He wants to reduce the size of government.

              • “Civil liberties are the reason you’re backing Buck? Really?”

                I said in my endorsement that rural and fiscal issues are my focus, and Buck is top class on those issues

                And again – I’m not convinced that Bennet/Romanoff are better on civil liberties – let’s not forget that Romanoff, as Speaker, held a special session to tough the toughest immigration laws that one State has ever seen

                In addition, I’ve seen Bennet do little to promote legislation that would increase civil liberties

                You can never agree with a candidate 100%, but of everyone running, Buck has the finest character by far, and he’s right on fiscal and rural issues

                • glasscup says:

                  But maybe not. What’s his actual record on fiscal issues, besides talking a big game?

                  Where has he been on earmarks? Where has he been on spending? It’s easy to talk about it, but what’s he actually done about it?

                  Two big thoughts with Buck…

                  1. He seems really extreme in a lot of his rhetoric.

                  2. He’s never really been vetted. We don’t know anything about him besides what he says on a lot of really important issues. I don’t know if we can trust him.

  2. 20th Maine says:

    Pols often calls out ‘news’ stories that aren’t really (or shouldn’t be) news stories.

    What was the rationale behind putting this on the front page?  You’re posting the primary endorsement of a guy who didn’t register on his own party’s radar and now lives in LA?  What’s the point?

    Buck’s got to be pumped.  Almost to a person, everyone who voted for him voted against Hasan at the assembly.  And I think that’s why you posted this – simply to add a single mustard seed (and that’s all it is) to even up the scale in the GOP primary.

    I bear no ill will to Ali.  He’s a great guy.  But typically that’s not enough to get your own thread published on the front page.  And usually I wouldn’t bother complaining about the transparent attempt here to influence a GOP primary (another newsflash!) but as a good man I’m trying not to let evil triumph by not doing anything… or something… not nothing… or something like that.

  3. Pat Boon says:

    Calling Bruce a fiscal conservative is like calling an atomic blast a stiff breeze. Did you hope to increase statewide support for Buck with this?

    • I believe the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights to be a divinely inspired document and I think most Republicans in Colorado believe the same – that will play well in the primary

      • Fidel's dirt nap says:

        Man Ali, sometimes you go a little overboard…

        • All taxes to be publicly approved?

          All surpluses instantly rebated?

          How is that not the best governance?

          The truest tragedy though is that the Colorado Republican Party is constantly throwing Rep Bruce under the bus – it speaks badly of our Party that we don’t do more to help our best fiscal conservatives

          Then again… we also (mistakenly) introduced C & D….

            • ClubTwitty says:

              Hmmm.  Or do you think the One dabbles in state policy often?  

              I also wondered about the Douglas Bruce name drop, I could see it helping in the Primary…

              Glad to see you on the Front Page, though, as completely wrong as you are.

          • JeffcoDemoJeffcoDemo says:

            Ask the legislators when they try to come up with a billion dollars worth of cuts next year.

            Ask the parents whose kids will find themseleves in classrooms from 28-32 kids and they find themselves paying extra for anything, busses, sports, art, anything.

            Ask the parents and students of our state colleges when they see tuition go up another 10% year after year.

            Ask the commuter stuck in traffic because we can’t build our roads.

            Ask the parents of a child with learning disabilities who can’t get help for two years.

            Ask the next victim that gets terrorized by the felon let out early.

            Ask the elderly as they see there property tax exemptions get cut year after year.

            Douglas Bruce, a coward that has to hide behing nameless and faceless fronts to further his destructive cause.  

            Yeah, nice endoresement, wonder how far that got ya.

            • fat chance 🙂

              Spending on CORRECTIONS has risen under Democratic control – correlate that with the Cornell Group (a private company that builds prisons and manages them here in Colorado) giving contributions to Democratic officials, with hundreds to thousands of new labor union jobs being created with every prison built, and you start to see why Democrats are so prison happy on Corrections spending

              If my taxes are being raised for the sake of reducing tuition rates on hardworking students at CU and CSU, then that’s one thing…. but to have my taxes raised so that Cornell can make more money and CODA can collect more from new labor union salaries….

              I don’t want my taxes going to that cause

            • Go Raiders* says:

              Ask the legislators when they try to come up with a billion dollars worth of cuts next year.

              How about asking them to sack up on that issue.  If they truly believe that more money is needed, then they always have the opportunity to go to the citizens and explain the needs and put a tax increase on the ballot….

              Oh wait, that might cost them their jobs…. guess that is most important after all.

              Denver Broncos… Still Suck!

      • VoyageurVoyageur says:

        Satan, after all, wrote TABOR.  It refutes everything Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount.

        • Barron X says:


          When the State takes taxes, under threat of confiscation or confinement, to redistribute money from the lower class working class to the middle class leisure class*, which is the overall net effect of Social Security, or for other redistribution schemes,

          the folks paying the taxes are not being charitable, they are simply bowing to the dictates of the oligopoly to keep their butts out of jail.  

          Jesus isn’t impressed with folks paying taxes.  No grace is bestowed for such compliance with the orders of the State.  

          * – a lot of money distributed through Social Security goes to folks who neither “earned” it nor need it.  My proof ?  The cruise industry is mostly financed by Social Security payments, and so is gambling at Blackhawk.


  4. dmindgo says:

    Actually, I’m very interested in the endorsement for Treasurer.  How about it?

  5. H-man says:


    It should not be seen as a problem if Republicans don’t agree on all issues with one another and manage to get along.  The question among Republicans and Dems is whether they agree on most of what they deem to be the most important issues and can put aside their disagreements.

    I am sure that Ali is less conservative than Buck on many social issues.  Most of us would say that the major issues that are calling out for attention in DC do not include gay marriage.  It is about spending and the economy.

    Perhaps gay marriage is the major issue in your life.  Ali sets forth pretty clearly what are the major issues for him.

    So far, the Senate endorsements from Republican candidates who did not make it on are

    Buck: Wiens, Barton and Hasan,

    Norton: Josh Penry.

  6. Jack Burden says:

    No offense, but who cares what Ali Hasan thinks?

    Not enough people, apparently.

    If your last name is Hasan, your endorsement only matters when checks come with it.  

    • I was the only statewide candidate that supported 60, 61, and 101, in addition to being the only candidate for Treasurer that took a stand against bailouts

      Granted, I wish the Convention result was different – and while I can’t claim to be the hardest right winger on social issues, very few Republicans in the State can beat my record on fiscal issues – as one of Colorado’s strongest fiscal conservatives, my endorsement does matter

    • I was the highest polling Republican in Eagle, Summit, and Lake counties in 2008 – I’m proud to have a base in those counties and my endorsement will help in tipping the balance in my home areas

      • Jack Burden says:

        1) Your personal life is your personal life. I’d like to go ahead and disagree with everything that Gray in the mountains has alleged against your relevancy as a candidate.

        2) You may have been the highest polling Republican in some very impressive counties, but you did lose. You were a losing candidate who has never held elected office. So, not that this is a point I would make, but those who are unable to get elected statewide themselves see Ken Buck as the people’s choice.

        3) What does your endorsement (which was very well-written, by the way) bring Ken Buck?

        I don’t have a dog in the Republican primary. In fact, I hope Buck wins because he’s not gonna raise as much money in the general. I just don’t understand why anyone would pay much attention to your endorsement. You’re not renowned for your conservative credentials. When someone says “Ali Hasan” I think of filmmaking, silly little stories in Westword, and campaign mismanagement in races that should be overwhelmingly winnable for you.

        And money. Lots and lots of money. Maybe that matters, I guess.  

        • Being the highest polling Republican in three Colorado counties (in 2008) is a big deal, as my endorsement will resonate with the primary voters there – Ken Buck still has to defeat Jane Norton in the primary, and I want every Republican in Lake, Eagle, and Summit voting for Buck  

  7. Gray in the mountains says:

    and I agree that the most beautiful tourism is in these areas. But, it is not true that there is no tourism in the metro area. I believe that the mint and the Denver History museum both rank very highly, perhaps even #1 and #2. And, I think that the new Cabela’s in GJ will likely become a very strong contender. Some think the meth capital of CO is rural but I think not

  8. Gray in the mountains says:

    and that has earned respect from some. But, do any of you believe that you’d have ever heard of him if it were not for papa’s $? He may be a good filmmaker, I’ve read that he received an award. But, does that make him in any way astute? I doubt he’d be doing anything you’d ever hear of if it weren’t for family money. I’ve never read anything he has done or said that I thought made him qualified for either of the offices he has pursued.

  9. Middle of the Road says:

    as you well know, I disagree with pretty much all the content in between the title and your Peace and Love sign off.

    That said, this is a nice endorsement. Well written. I think Buck is probably quite pleased to have your support.


  10. Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

    Could you maybe provide some data to support this claim:

    Colorado’s three biggest economic forces are agriculture, energy, and tourism,

    The last time I looked it up was during the height of the gas drilling boom (a couple of years ago), and at that time energy and mining made up about 4% of Colorados’ economy, gas and oil being only a part of that economic sector.

    Maybe things have changed since then and I am happy to be proven wrong, but I am afraid I am not inclined to take your word for it. Citations, please.

    • I don’t have a footnote on hand, but I remember this from my research at-large

      I’ll have to dig through, but I’ll do my best to give you a footnote soon

      • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

        I have to go to a jobsite this afternoon, but I will follow up with you tonight.

      • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

        and nothing so far backing up Alis’ claim that energy is one of Colorados’ three biggest economic sectors.

        I will assume, MAH, that if you had something, I would have seen it by now…so I will say this.

        The O&G industry operates on a principle of deception in many ways. One of those ways is the exaggeration of their own importance. I guess that is supposed to make us willingly accept their constant excesses and mistakes and not push for an end to our dependence on their poisonous industry.

        I think it is safe to say that, if this country had made a concerted effort to wean ourselves of this filthy fuel source when the Arab oil embargo came in the early seventies, the gulf coast would be clean and pristine as we speak and the economies of the gulf states would not be facing such devastation.

        But, as Rachel Maddow pointed out last week, the most profitable companies on the planet are the “Big Five” multi-national oil companies. They will persist as long as the consuming public allows them to do so.

        As I have said before: The day my hope for the survival of the planet will return, is the day that Exxon/Mobil offers to sell the world a barrel of oil for $5, and the world says, “no thanks, we don’t need it”.

        • I honestly remember reading a doc from my State House race that said such data, and unfortunately, I’ve misplaced it – with that said, I think most agree that the three industries mentioned (Energy, Tourism, and Agriculture) are huge to Colorado – I’m still doing my best to find the doc

          • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

            The numbers I have quoted come from a Colorado Department of

            Natural Resources publication that was published in 08, as I recall.

            At that time, the CERI study stated that O&G supported 71,000 jobs in this state. It was a wild extrapolation (including waitresses, hotel maids, etc.) of the actual numbers from the Colo. Dept. of Labor which indicated that there were about 9,800 jobs in the O&G sector. It is not at all uncommon for O&G PR people to overstate their economic impact…among other obfuscatory information they readily disseminate.

  11. Half Glass FullHalf Glass Full says:

    That was a rather jarring comment to make, considering Douglas Bruce’s outlaw tactics of late.

  12. Half Glass FullHalf Glass Full says:

    Can you please provide us with copies of all those water articles that Scott McInnis was paid $150,000 to write by the Hasan Family Foundation?

    Or if he ended up not writing any, can you please disclose the original terms of the grant, copies of the papers that McInnis had to sign to get the money (if any), and other documentation?

    It just smells bad that McInnis would get paid such an obscene sum from the Hasan family to write some papers in the first place – let alone papers that either were never written at all or, at a minimum, never got published anywhere.

  13. JeffcoDemoJeffcoDemo says:

    This year, with DECIDE.  But the republicans were afraid to let the voters decide.  About as anti-TABOR as you can get.

  14. Car 31 says:

    You would have done more harm than good while supporting 60, 61, and 101.  You may agree with the idea that government should live within its means, and I would agree with that, to a point.

    The upcoming ballot measures, however, are not an answer to this problem. They are not an answer to the frustration people feel about the large federal deficit. They are not an answer for conservatives.

    These ballot initiatives would do more harm to rural Colorado than anything else in your conservative philosophy. Some cities and counties would have to slash their budgets by a third and never recoup the revenue.  How does that help a small rural county already living paycheck to paycheck? Unemployment would increase, yet there would be no services to help the unemployed so more people would move to urban population centers. Although, wait!, the urban centers wouldn’t have the money to help the newcomers either.

    School districts would be forced to increase class size, lay off teachers, reduce the number of school busses bringing children to school in rural areas. Rural school capital improvement projects would be mothballed and schools would fall farther into disrepair.

    You’ll disagree, of course, but the figures I’ve heard, from people smarter than you, state that if these ballot measures were to pass, Colorado would lose another 100,000 +/- jobs. You know how many jobs we lost in this latest recession? Around 100,000.

    Ali, you’re advocating for Coloradans to vote themselves another recession on top of the one we just had.

    I appreciate your beliefs, but find it fascinating, in a way someone watches a train wreck, that you and others like you continue to advocate for these hair-brained ideas instead of actually doing the hard work of solving problems.

    Don’t go spouting you want what is best for rural Colorado because you grew up in a prosperous rural/resort on the Western slope. No city council, county commissioner nor any rural citizen who has any indication of how government works supports the ideas behind 60, 61, and 101.

    Best of luck to you and, no offense intended, I hope to never see your name on another ballot in Colorado as long as I live.

    • ….unless I run for President, there’s a decent chance your wish will come true

      I wish love and peace upon you as well, brother…

    • redstateblues says:

      And as long as there isn’t a middle ground to be found with so-called conservatives, then it’s up to the party that has found itself the only one capable of making adult decisions to make those decisions.

      Voters will shoot down these ballot proposals, just as they have shot down tax increases they didn’t like. Colorado voters are not nearly as dumb as conservatives like Doug Bruce, and sadly, Ali Hasan, give them credit for.

      • The realistThe realist says:

        every time they are faced with extreme ballot measures, have to cough up a lot of money to fight the initiatives.  

        • redstateblues says:

          about tax increases. Conservatives say “put it to the voters!” and then they spend millions in ads fighting the tax increases. People become inundated by the ads (pro and con) and end up voting no on almost everything.

          Luckily that will help because there’s not that much good on the ballot that I’ve seen (I’m hoping there will be, but I don’t know every initiative) so maybe the instinct to just say no will stop things like the Dr. Evil initiatives and the personhood amendment.

      • Barron X says:


        “… the party that has found itself the only one capable of making adult decisions …”

        obviously doesn’t refer to either the GOP or the Democrats, so who are U referring to ?


    • gijoe says:


      It’s “hare-brained”, hot stuff. Unless you are living in the 1500s.

      And, anyway, use of this phrase is demeaning of our animal friends. Considering your tone and attitude, animals may be your best hope for companionship. So maybe put a sock in it.

  15. ScottP says:

    So people think that if you agree with Bruce politically, then you too must be a complete jackass.

    Ali, you’re not a complete jackass. It’s nice to find someone with extreme political views who doesn’t resort to name calling and poo flinging when they’re challenged.

    I think I would’ve lost some respect for you had you backed Foot-In-Her-Mouth-Norton. At least Buck has a little bit of substance behind his words.

  16. Hey folks – many comments above regarding my friendship with Rep Douglas Bruce and my support of 60, 61, and 101

    Just for the record – Doug Bruce is one of my political heroes and mentors – I love him like family

    I decided that the Taxpayers Bill of Rights was one of the greatest laws written in modern times, back when I was in high school and we had to read up on what some of our favorite laws were – since then, Bruce was always one of my heroes

    The run for State Treasurer didn’t go the way I was hoping, but one of the best parts was being mentored by Bruce – it’s something I’ll never forget and I’ll always treasure

    Again – I will maintain that the Colorado Republican Party has done little, if anything, to preserve and protect the legacy and reputation of Douglas Bruce – we say we are the Party of TABOR, but we have a history of trashing both TABOR and Bruce – ultimately, history will show it to be the biggest failure of the Colorado Republican Party – surely, the Democrats in Colorado protect their best activists – we (as Republicans in Colorado) do little to protect ours

    Regarding 60, 61, and 101 –

    60 is a terrific law – it would reverse the mil levy freeze and that’s a good thing – from the research I read, the monies collected from the mil levy freeze mostly go to school programs in Denver, while smaller counties, like my home county of Eagle, are being exploited into paying taxes that they can put to better use if kept in the home counties – in addition, the mil levy freeze was completely unconstitutional – thus, memo to Democrats – if you want more money, then fine, just ask for it – but when you do manipulative things to get it (like the mil levy freeze) do not underestimate the power of the voters to repeal such garbage

    Regarding 101 – another great law – while “fees” have been determined by the Colorado courts to not count as “taxes,” I still believe that voters should vote on increased fees, including taxes on cell phones and cars – hopefully, 101’s ultimate passing will carry on to a bill that defines “fees” as taxes

    Lastly, I will admit that 61 will have devastating consequences on our State budget – nonetheless, the good news is that it will force us to create a rainy day fund, in addition to funding the State with money surpluses up-front, rather than borrowing – 61 will create around 3 to 5 years of difficult cuts, but the end result will be celebrated

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.