President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Anna Stout





CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Richard Holtorf

(R) Deborah Flora




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Doug Lamborn*


CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen


CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Scott James




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 15, 2016 5:29 am MST

Ken Buck Tweets False Choice: Security vs. Environment

  • by: kwtree

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Representative Ken Buck (CD4) tweeted yesterday that his amendment helps soldiers “focus on immediate national security needs, not climate change”. However, the Department of Defense’s own analysis says that climate change is a major threat to stability worldwide, and should be included in all planning.

Ken Buck’s tweet on June 14, 2016:

Ken Buck's tweet
That’s Buck, standing with the military against evil Greenies.

And he’s using Bernie Sanders/ Elizabeth Warren language about “crony capitalism” just to confuse folks:

So what’s got Mr. Buck going all “Fight the Power” here? Rep. Buck doesn’t like the Department of Defense spending on renewable energy sources to power its facilities.

For example, Fort Drum, New York has a military base running 100% on biomass. The public might applaud this energy self-sufficiency – remember all that rhetoric about not being “addicted to oil”? But Buck’s standing strong against it. Ken Buck’s amendment would have prevented using renewable energy on this project.

According to Heritage Action for America, a conservative lobbying /watchdog group:

The House will vote on an amendment by Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO)to H.R. 4909, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. The amendment would prohibit funding for the renewable energy mandate at DOD and prohibit the Secretary of Defense from purchasing alternative energy unless it is equivalent to conventional energy in terms of cost and capability.

Fortunately, Buck’s Energy Reform Amendment (#245) to the Department of Defense budget was defeated:

The amendment went down to defeat 266-159, with Stefanik and Rep. Chris Gibson, R-Kinderhook, and 81 other Republicans joining 183 Democrats (including Rep. Paul Tonko, D-Amsterdam) against 159 Republicans favoring it. The $602 billion NDAA, which puts the imprint of Congress on what the U.S. military looks like in the coming year, passed the House on Wednesday night without the amendment 277-147.

So Ken Buck is bragging about an amendment he sponsored to the Defense Department’s 2017 budget, which would have prevented the DoD from using renewable energy. And Buck’s amendment was defeated – the DoD is still going to use renewable energy, because their own analysts say that climate change is a threat to national security.

Nice try, Bucko.



14 thoughts on “Ken Buck Tweets False Choice: Security vs. Environment

  1. The fossil fuels industries in the U.S. receive tens of billions of dollars of tax breaks and subsidies from the taxpayer … that's crony capitalism, too.

    So, what it really amounts to is that Buck is trying to award even more favors to his big campaign contributors.

    Ken Buck — just another hypocritical politician.

      1. There's little daylight between the climate beliefs of Buck and Muslim clerics.  Both of their positions are equally absurd. 

        Seyyed Youssef Tabatabi-nejad, a senior Islamic cleric in Isfahan, Iran, said during his weekly sermon last Friday that women dressing inappropriately is causing climate change.

        In his sermonTabatabi-nejad urged Iran’s "moral police" to crack down on "improper veiling" and to do everything they can to keep Iran’s population as moral as possible. (Yes, Iran has an undercover police force that is purely dedicated to making sure that people act and dress according to their faith.) 

        But Tabatabi-nejad is not concerned with long-term issues such as the souls of the women who are not wearing their scarves in the car and taking long romantic walks with their boyfriends in public; he has more immediate concerns.

        In his sermon, Tabatabi-nejad announced that his “office had received photos of women next to the dry Zayandeh-run River (a major river that runs through Isfahan), [dressed] as if they were in Europe. It is these sorts of acts that cause the river to dry up.”


        1. Pity that there isn't a Fundamentalists of the World conference. Jerry Falwell, Pastor Hagee, Pat Robertson, Steven Anderson, and Gordon Klingenschmitt could promote their ideas that comfortably dressed women,  gay people, fornicators, voodoo practitioners, and others  cause hurricanes, 9/11,massacres, earthquakes, and disembowelment of pregnant women.

          It seems that Muslim fundamentalists have a lot of crazy talk in common with these guys. They should all get together in one low-lying, earthquake – prone, buggy location so that God in one of her/his guises could smack them and their true believers flat with a giant ZOT.

          Of course, I'm way too nice a person ever to harbor such a revenge fantasy myself – but it would be such a special occasion.


          1. This.  From a Baptist preacher in Sacramento.  Any guess on who he's voting for?  (I'm guessing Gordon and this man would get along just fine). 

            “I think Orlando, Fla., is a little safer tonight,” he told his congregation, equating members of the LGBT community to sexual predators. “The tragedy is more of them didn’t die…. I’m kind of upset he didn’t finish the job!”

            Jimenez also said if it were up to him, gays and lesbians would be lined up against a wall so a firing squad could “blow their brains out.”

  2. Perhaps someone should remind Mr. Buck that by using renewable energy, at places like Ft. Drum, that frees up oil and gas products to fuel our fighter jets, B-52's etc and therefore we have additional supplies of traditional energy to defend the country.

    1. True, R36. One of the first justifications for using renewables was that they would preserve a future in which commercial air travel is possible.

      I suspect that military flight would always be prioritized, but we might lose the ability to get that gizmo overnight from Amazon via air freight.




Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

53 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!