PPC Homepage

Ken Buck and the dumbasses

by | 8:36 am, July 27, 2010 | 4 Comments

While I was traveling, Ken Buck was caught, not knowing he was being recorded, calling those Tea Party members who ask him questions about Barack Obama’s birth place and birth certificate “dumbasses”.

Jane Norton pounced on the question, implying that Buck was basically slamming the Tea Party while trying to claim their mantle for his race.

Buck says, of course, that he was just talking about the so-called “birthers”.

My take is that they’re both stretching the truth.

I don’t think Buck was talking about the Tea Party broadly when he called some of its members “dumbasses”, as Mrs. Norton suggested, but I thought it was interesting that he implied that all birthers are Tea Party members, and thus that the Tea Party is an attractor for many with out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

So, while Buck’s comment certainly wasn’t meant as an insult to the entire Tea Party movement, I do think that in an unintended way (and perhaps not understood by Jane Norton either), it did show some lack of understanding of or appreciation for the Tea Party movement.

For the record, I think there is a greater-than-zero but less than 50/50 chance that Barack Obama was not born in the US and is not eligible to be our president.  I think there is a much more than 50/50 chance that there are things in his records which he does not want the public to see because they’ll show that he got whatever advantages he could by doing things as a foreigner, perhaps such as scholarships for schools.

The most transparent president in history, as he fashions himself, is the most closed book we’ve seen in a long time.

In the meantime, I doubt Ken Buck’s gaffe will hurt him very much…except, perhaps, with those voters who are indeed “birthers” and don’t like being called names for having suspicions which, while politically inconvenient for Buck to discuss, are not totally beyond reason.

I don’t have a prediction as to which way this race is going, but I doubt that annoying a few “birthers” will be the difference in the race.  If Norton is successful in painting Buck’s comment as more broadly anti-Tea Party, that could be a bigger factor, but I think that’s rather unlikely.  Also, a lot of people have probably mailed ballots in already, so these things are becoming less significant.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Share
Category: Colorado Politics, Politics, Syndicated
Tags: >

Comments

  1.   Val
      July 27th, 2010 @ 11:23 am

    The problem is, Ross, that a tiny group of radical birthers shows up and tries to take over meetings. It is that minuscule group he was addressing. While his word might have been more carefully chosen, he is after all, a mortal human being. If we want God on the ticket, we’ll have to nominate him next time.

    I had the same sort of thing happen at my caucus and had to shut them down lest they completely run everyone away.

    Ken favors legislation that would require proof of a candidate’s citizenship and country of birth. To try to push that with Obama is to push for something that has little or no chance of succeeding. It is already in the courts. There are so many more pressing issues to be addressed.

    This is a non-issue. The pro-freedom and liberty groups agree.

    Read the Denver Post article before forming a position.
    http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15600796

    Of Jane Norton’s last email, Al Maurer says, “Two lies in the first two sentences.”
    http://www.theconstitutionalisttoday.com/norton-campaign-shows-desperation/

  2.   Harry
      July 27th, 2010 @ 2:49 pm

    Ross:
    When I read the title I thought you and your friends, Josh, Jane and Cheri were doing back up vocals.:)
    Perhaps a version of “I heard it through the grapevine”? With so much gossip and disinformation being spewed by your endorsed candidate I figured you guys would know the song by heart.

  3.   Rossputin
      July 27th, 2010 @ 5:16 pm

    So, Harry, let me get this straight:

    You read the title of my note, assumed that I would say something different, then when I said something you didn’t expect you didn’t have the balls to say you assumed wrong?

    Instead of saying, “Ross, I assumed from your title that you were going to write some Norton talking points. I was glad to see that you didn’t”, you simply tried to create some sort of guilt by association because you actually didn’t mind (or at least didn’t hate) what I wrote.

    That’s some pathetic intellectual dishonesty on your part.

    By the way, can you please show me ONE Norton supporter who has been as critical of Cheri as I have? Really, just one would be great.

    You’ve shown your true colors…now I know.

  4.   Harry
      July 27th, 2010 @ 6:39 pm

    Ross:
    I thought I conveyed that the name: Ken Buck and the Dumbasses sounded like the name of a singing group, you know like Diana Ross and the Supremes, etc.
    So what is this balls to assume nonesense?

Praise for PPC From Our Lefty "Fan"

  • "Zany-ass bombast-entertainment...Hackneyed weirdo communist pseudo-nostalgia" --Alan Franklin, ProgressNow

Featured Posts




  • When a young girl gets close to the truth about a long-forgotten mystery, a harmless adventure becomes a threat to the future of the independent commercial settlements on Mars.

  • Advertise Here!

    info-at-peoplespresscollective-dot-org

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Meta




  • Buy a Tea Party Poster!