John Harwood interviews Ken Buck

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

John has an extensive informal interview with Ken in Greeley:

0 Shares

41 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Ellie says:

    Thank you.  Ken Buck has come a long way in the interview arena in the last year.  Those that discount him in the general election do so at their own risk.  

    My question is, will he be his own man (person) if he’s elected or will he fall into the black hole of partisan politics in order to unseat Obama in 2012?  

  2. DA to Senate makes about as much sense as DA actor trying to be President. This is some scary stuff. Rhetoric without substance or specificity.  After going so far right he went right of reality, I guess he can attempt to do what most DA’s do, re-argue the point and change faces again.

  3. Froward69 says:

    “over $250,000 creates MOST of the jobs” Bullshit! 2% of Americans make more than $250,000 if you own a small business and make more than $250,000 you are stealing from your own company.

    “Obama is engaged in class warfare” again BULLSHIT! the only class warfare being waged is between republicans and the rest of the country.

    “Health care not passed in Americans best interest” Yet health care was the #1 issue that elected Bill Clinton AND Barack Obama. the end run to passage was necessary to overcome republican obstructionism.

    so ol buck is A-OK with giving subsidies to fossil fuels but against giving THE VERY SAME breaks to renewable energy.

    OK then  

    like the fence behind him… Bucks logic is broken and letting reality escape.

    • Libertad says:

      after voting to spend trillions more on bailouts, Obummercare, cap and trade …,


      in my view we have nothing to show for it.

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      if you own a small business and make more than $250,000 you are stealing from your own company.

      My company is a sub-chapter S. So any profit at the end of the year is viewed as income to me. We keep enough in the bank to cover all expenses including payroll for 6 months. So growing my company means I make well over 250K each year in “profit.” I have to to keep that reserve growing.

      With that said, I fully support allowing the tax cuts on income over 250K to expire. Because a growing economy will make me more money than a slightly reduced tax rate and an ongoing recession.

    • Lets see if the House Passes it, Bennet rubber stamped it. Buck N’ Bennet (even though Bennet rubber-stamped it) are still clueless about how to “fix the economic mess.”

      Buck with that “Balance Budget Amendment” solution, needs to get a history lesson or maybe someone should tell him how Government works… Jeeez

      Let alone, he is clueless as far as how that will solve the economic mess we have this year, next year, after 2012 and the years after…oh…then if the States ratified it…hmmm.. How’s that ERA doing…

      Maybe, he needs to go back to, throwing out everything but the constitutional sink, like get rid of this and that Department or thrash this and that amendment.

      Serious, folks, you have a hard choice here…Buck n’ Bennet for Colorado?

  4. glasscup says:

    He’s now saying he doesn’t support the “fair tax”. He does.

    http://www.libertycandidatesea

    VERY. VERY. EXPLICITLY.

    I can’t believe the press is letting him get away with this nonsense. He is lying about the positions he took during the primary.  

  5. dmindgo says:

    Ken Buck does a great job of presenting himself as reasonable.  He’s sounds good overall but then the actual words can be disturbing.  

    I really like “I love … the environment,” but he wants to use more fossil fuels.  Those aren’t compatible statements but he sounds reasonable.  I assume he supports the Clean Air Act, but his concerns about a free market make it likely he would support non-enforcement.  Nothing he says makes me think he would act to protect the environment if the tradeoff is business concerns.

    On immigration, do people realize we didn’t have immigration laws for a long time?  Why are the current laws so skewed against people from Mexico and South America?  What is the rationale for that?

    Bennet really has his work cut out for him.

    • H-man says:

      There are two gas wells on his property. It looks like the place is well kept up and not an environmental eye sore to me.

      The critical piece is development that is consistent with environmental statndards. I think people fool themselves when they opposed development of fossil fuels in the US.  The alternative is importing fuel from places with lesser environmental statndards.

      • ClubTwitty says:

        Where does most of our Natural Gas come from H?

        Gas development can be done better and worse.  There are Best Management Practices that can greatly reduce the (but not eliminate) harm to the environment.  But they have to be required.  Companies will always implement the minimal standards required, to them its good business practice.

        No one I know, and these are circles I run in, ‘oppose fossil fuel development in the US.’  Rather, those I work and associate with want regulations that protect our water, our air, our wildlife, our quality-of-life, and our economy (through realistic severance taxes, balanced development–rather than boom and bust, etc.).

        The GOP mantra that anyone who advocates for better regulations is opposed to any and all natgas or other energy development is a straw man, or as my old man use to say ‘horsefeathers.’

        • H-man says:

          I agree there needs to be best practices required to ensure appropriate development. Just because GOP mantra as you recall it says all regulatation is bad and against development, don’t assume that Buck goes along with that.  He always notes words to the effect consistent with environmental standards when he talks about development of Colorado’s fossil fuels.

          It is oversimplistic to say all Dems are for environmental protection.  All Republicans are opposed.  It has been a while but I seem to remember Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican.

          Buck is for a smaller federal government, not a worse one.

      • dmindgo says:

        No one has opposed, across-the-board, development of fossil fuels in the US.  The push, with Colorado one of the leading states and La Plata County one of its leaders, is for accountability.  Oil & Gas and its supporters have railed against the new regs.  Republicans have pledged to repeal them.  How do you bring that into compatibility w/ “The critical piece is development that is consistent with environmental statndards (sic).”?

        And “the place is well kept up” is very funny.  I didn’t say anything before, but look at the video again.  Behind Buck is a broken rail across the field.  I don’t call that well kept up.  My take on gas wells is that they are not an eyesore of themselves.  What is an eyesore is the acre or so of property that they clear and fence for the pad.  They can make the pad area smaller but demand that much.  I think that area has even been reduced by regs over the years.  Admit it, gas companies only responsibility is to make money and they do it the cheapest and easiest way.  Regulation is what makes capitalism work.  The current incarnation of Republican leaders, including Buck, profess the free market is the only way to go.  That kind of statement clearly points to a system with very little, if any, regulation.  But they are dishonest and won’t say that because they know most people despise that viewpoint.

  6. CrazyOkie says:

    Although…

    1)  He doesn’t believe in man-made cause of global warming.  

    2)  Believes in expanding coal, oil and natural gas exploration and usage.  

    3)  Is not sure about “green jobs”.

    4)  Would like to limit the power of the EPA.

    This makes me crazy – how an individual can say they support a cause and then be against all tenets that represent that cause.

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.