In Colorado, Ken Buck tells the truth about birthers

Because we’ve reached the peculiar point in our political discourse when mainstream Republicans can’t point out the lunacy of birthers, Ken Buck, Colorado candidate for the GOP Senate nomination, has committed the quintessential political gaffe: He told the truth.

Buck has rightly been criticized for a sexist remark about his female GOP opponent, saying primary voters should support him because he “doesn’t wear high heels.” His commit about birthers, however, is dead on.

From TPM:

Buck is the Tea Party candidate running against establishment pick Jane Norton in Colorado’s Republican Senate primary. His latest gaffe is being caught on tape by a Democratic operative saying, “Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates while I’m on the camera?” according to The Denver Post. Without walking it completely back, Buck has already told the Post the language was inappropriate.

(In Georgia, Nathan Deal, seeking the GOP nomination for governor, has run to embrace the birthers.)

You can understand why Buck is troubled that he might be identified with a group of delusional folks who insist that Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States. If he is to have a shot at winning the general election in purple Colorado, he has to appear mainstream to appeal to centrists who know the birthers are nuts.

Buck committed a similar gaffe earlier when he was caught on tape criticizing Colorado’s far-right loon (and former Republican Congressman) Tom Tancreado, who says he’s going to launch an independent bid for the governor’s office:

First, he was caught saying “I can’t believe that guy opened his mouth” after former Rep. Tom Tancredo called President Obama a greater threat to the country than Al Qaeda. Norton pounced, and eventually forced Buck to say he saw some “truth” in Tancredo’s words.

Oh, my.

87 comments Add your comment

StJ

July 26th, 2010
12:28 pm

Throw the birthers in jail! How dare they!?

Joel

July 26th, 2010
12:31 pm

Het CT did you tell people to stop saying GW stole the election in 2000?

HDB

July 26th, 2010
12:37 pm

The truth DOES hurt……but as long as it’s the truth, it’ll be difficult to counter……

Granny Godzilla

July 26th, 2010
12:43 pm

Birthers, Flat earthers and tenthers…..oh my!

Peadawg

July 26th, 2010
12:49 pm

I kinda like Ken Buck. Nice attitude there!

Good Grief

July 26th, 2010
12:53 pm

Why is it that CT always refers to conservatives as “far right loons” but she never has anything bad to say about Liberals? Is that a double standard?

You Asked

July 26th, 2010
12:54 pm

Sometimes there just aren’t other words to describe them.

Richard

July 26th, 2010
12:54 pm

Bill O’reilly has been speaking loudly against the birthers for months.

You Asked

July 26th, 2010
12:55 pm

Enter your comments here

You Asked

July 26th, 2010
12:55 pm

Oops- got trigger happy there. Sorry.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
12:58 pm

HDB, I’m not sure I understand your use of the word “truth”. do you mean the “truth” about Obama’s birth certificate hurts liberals, or the “truth” about birthers (delsional, muckraking loons) hurts true conservatives? here’s the bottom line, I think “true” tea party/libertarians are foolish if they think the romatic overtures on the part of neo-cons (Palin) is anything but a “hump and dump” (after November). that said, to each his own (even those pesky homosexual who want to marry, or serve in the military, as other Americans do). at the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter if Obama was born on Mars, is a socialist, or his a “Muslim mole”. he is the President of the United States. personally, I think he’s provided enough ammo to have serious (paleo) conservatives vote him out in 2 years, but it amazes me that Sarah Palin and Newt Gingerich seem to be the best the (neo) right has to offer.

hahahahahaha!!!!

July 26th, 2010
12:58 pm

This is taken out of context, as well you know. Amazing. After CT spent a week hypocritically preaching about “context,” here she goes putting her own nasty foot in her mouth.

Good Grief

July 26th, 2010
12:59 pm

Sadly, I’m finding this to be a fact among most people I talk to. It’s very hard to have open debate anymore about political issues. Many of my left-leaning colleagues jump immediately on the “racist” bandwagon and it becomes impossible to discuss anything. Of course, I said long ago that anybody who disagrees with Obama would be labelled a racist, just as anyone who disagreed with Hillary would be called a sexist. The moment you call someone a name you effectively end the debate, regardless of winner or loser.

Jiles

July 26th, 2010
1:00 pm

Why do the kooks get crazy anytime someone ask to see Odumba’s birth certificate? Afterall, this is the same Communist that promised to be “THE MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY,” yet he refuses to release his birth certificate, school transcripts or medical records. All we know about him is the little bit he’s told us. If a Republican was this secretive Cindy wouldn’t go a minute without b*tching about it.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
1:02 pm

and shame on Buck for apologizing for using the word “dumbasses”. I am pretty sure Beavis and Butthead coined the phrase (or brought it into American pop culture), and frankly, B&B demonstrated more cogent arguments (”this is cool…” “this sucks….”) arguments than the birthers. note to Buck, they are “dumbasses…” stick to your guns.

pat

July 26th, 2010
1:03 pm

hmmm, not much to talk about? Couldn’t think of a more irrelavent topic? Ho hum. I’ll never get this time back. Crap.

Mike K.

July 26th, 2010
1:04 pm

The Birthers are nuts, and a guy like Buck is right to criticize them. I wonder, however, why Cynthia didn’t criticize the New York Times when it ran two pieces questioning whether John McCain was a natural born citizen.

I also wonder why my normal IP address (I also normally post as Michael K.) has been blocked from this blog. I’m neither rude nor uncivil. Have I been blocked simply because I’m conservative?

Thomas

July 26th, 2010
1:04 pm

He is the President and that is a timing issue- I would be interested in more info and dialogue about the ga governor candidates.

Good Grief

July 26th, 2010
1:06 pm

If you were blocked because you are conservative, then I should’ve been kicked off the AJC altogether. I’ve said some radically conservative things on CT’s blog.

Scout

July 26th, 2010
1:11 pm

“And so he bowed.”

Ivan

July 26th, 2010
1:13 pm

You know liberals fear the fast approaching November, when they’re ignoring their own faulty run of government and trying to distract you by pointing to “Birthers”.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
1:19 pm

Good Grief, there are plenty of left wing loons. The problem is, they are not the ones obsessed with Obama’s birth certificate. Next question. Jiles, you need to keep your questions on message. Obama was elected President of the United States. he filled out all the forms and was “vetted” just like all candidates (for example, John McCain, who was NOT born in the United States). He received the majority of electoral votes and was sworn in as the 44th POTUS. so what is your plan? expose this great “fraud” and have Joe Biden take the reins? Or, would you like to schedule a “do over” election (but the GOP would have to reunite McCain-Plain, you know, just to be fair).

No Justice No Peace

July 26th, 2010
1:22 pm

I demand an immediate investigation into the CIA, FBI, INTERPOL, DHS,The Social Security Administration, INS, E-Verify, and all high ranking members of the Bush Administration. If the Birthers claims re true, I hold all the above mentioned parties responsible for GROSS misconduct if they weren’t able to verify Obamas credentials prior to his winning the nomination in 2009. Or, as I have always suspected, the Birthers are simply full of S*%T.

kayaker 71

July 26th, 2010
1:23 pm

Where were all the libs in the media when Dan Rather got canned? When do we drop back and examine all of the liberal rhetoric when it was supposed that John McCain was porking one of his campaign workers?
I also have had posts dropped, mainly based on what those delightful Panthers said. How about it, CT? A little too close to home?

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
1:29 pm

Mike K, check your copy, amigo. The NY Times piece concerns the legal opinion of a U of AZ law professor (Chin) who added, “…it is proposterous that a technicality like this can make a difference in an advanced democracy…, but this is the Constitutional text that we have.” you can file this under “once a lawyer, always a lawyer”. so, the NYT, as any news outlet is prone to do, simply reported the story (as I am certain it has reported on numerous “birther” stories, citing their claims, but not expressing an opinion). Now. if some freelance scribe or Editorial Page employee penned an EDITORIAL on the subject, it woul be up to the Editors at the NYT to run the screed, or not (will it sell in Peoria?).

Granny Godzilla

July 26th, 2010
1:30 pm

kayaker 71

i’m pretty sure your use of the term “porking” is a first.

hopefully the last as well.

jconservative

July 26th, 2010
1:30 pm

If one believes Obama was not born in the USA their problem should be with the United States Passport Agency that issued Obama a Passport when he was 4 years old and again when he was in his early 20’s. And keeps renewing that last one. All based on his non-existent birth certificate.

Lets see, Johnson was President when Obama got his first passport and Reagan was President when Obama got his last passport. All the proof one needs that both Johnson and Reagan were agents of the worldwide Communist conspiracy.

andygrd

July 26th, 2010
1:30 pm

Good Grief, your point is well taken. Today, it is impossible to have an honest debate on any issue. On both sides of the isle, the loons come out and spew garbage.

The lefties quote people from MSNBC and the righties quote from Fox. Both quote other sources as well, but only those sources supporting their point of view. They present facts from the right or left as being gospel… many remind me of parrots…

Most of what is on TV today is just entertainment, very little journalistic integrity anymore. For you see, and this is my opinion, neither side can really justify their positions, so they use fear and scare tactics.
What we need is a true media that presents the facts and we can draw our own conclusions. The media in this country treats the average American, who they think is lazy an uneducated , as someone they can just spoon feed opinions rather than facts and we will accept. And based upon some of the comments I have read here, in some cases, they are pretty accurate.
Two benefits from reading the posts, they can be entertaining and I thank my parents for stressing the importance of an education.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
1:31 pm

I thought “Maverick” McCain wants nothing to do with pork?

Keepin' it real

July 26th, 2010
1:34 pm

The Birthers are right-wing Christian fanatics who hate everyone who is different from them: Latinos, Blacks, Muslims, Liberals, etc.. Fly to Hawaii and inspect the document yourself you cheapskates!!!!

See how many of these fanatics quote the Bible, watch Rush/Glenn, deny the science behind Global Warming but not behind Creationism (6000 y.o.-yeah, right nutjobs). The Birthers, like Tea Partiers, the Christian Zionists/Armageddonists are pretty much the same group. Small-minded, racist and intolerant white fanatics who hate both the mainstream media because it brings new ideas to light and anyone not ‘white’ and ‘Judeo-Christian’.

I love Ron Paul, though, he hate NeoCons!!! To bad the right-wing is full of them warmongerers.

ctucker

July 26th, 2010
1:34 pm

Good Grief, Pls don’t lie on me. I certainly don’t refer to “conservatives” as “far right loons.” I know perfectly well all conservatives are not birthers.

kayaker 71

July 26th, 2010
1:35 pm

Granny,

We could call it a number of things….. how about having an illicit affair that if reported, would damage his chances for the presidency. Please comment on that instead of examining the fine points. Personally, I think “porking” is pretty descriptive.

Granny Godzilla

July 26th, 2010
1:37 pm

kayaker 71

how gracious of you to set the parameters of my comments to you!
how “angle-ish” can you get!

kayaker 71

July 26th, 2010
1:41 pm

Not being”angle-ish” at all…… and also not setting the parameters of your comments. Say what you will. You have a way of dodging the bullet when it gets a bit close to home, just like CT. Now give me another cute comment like you usually do. Can’t wait.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
1:45 pm

kayaker71, illicit adj. – not sanctioned by custom, or law. illegal. do you really want to open that can of worms? seems to me, if a candidate fears any “potential damage” or fallout from an extra-marital affair, he/she needs to not have an affair. Or, if you are of the Clinton “custom” and you really don’t care what others think about your marriage, or your “customs” when it comes to marriage, that’s OK, too.

ctucker

July 26th, 2010
1:46 pm

kayaker 71, I remember the NYT story about John McCain, and I thought it went way out on a limb about an alleged affair without supporting evidence. so I never mentioned that. And I don’t remember lots of “lib rhetoric” about it. The story was roundly criticized in journalism circles.
As for your posts being dropped, you know perfectly well you get into trouble with links.

Good Grief

July 26th, 2010
1:50 pm

Point taken, CT. (Obviously, I wouldn’t hang around if I didn’t enjoy the back-and-forth taking place here.) But let’s all be honest here and say that we’re all slightly biased to those who support our point of view, eh?

Now, Keepin’ It Real, what does a person’s religion have to do with this? No where in the article did CT call out any religious groups. But you and Granny both brought up some tenet of religion. Granted, Granny only said “flat earthers” but you launched into a scathing rant about how “The Birthers are right-wing Christian fanatics who hate everyone who is different from them” and “See how many of these fanatics quote the Bible, watch Rush/Glenn, deny the science behind Global Warming but not behind Creationism (6000 y.o.-yeah, right nutjobs). The Birthers, like Tea Partiers, the Christian Zionists/Armageddonists are pretty much the same group. Small-minded, racist and intolerant white fanatics who hate both the mainstream media because it brings new ideas to light and anyone not ‘white’ and ‘Judeo-Christian’. ”

Pardon me, but I feel a little offended that you had to stoop to such low levels to attack. Then again, that has become standard fair in politics these days. Don’t worry about an argument, just call your opposition names and then sit back in comfort. Right?

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
1:53 pm

jconservative, excellent post. seems to me the “birthers” need to start asking themselves why this “Muslim mole” as acting so much like Bush (was W part of the same conspiracy)? Oh, yeah, and didn’t the Communists kinda go belly-up? don’t tell me they also want a “do over” in terms of world domination? perhaps, despite the collapse communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the “communists in exile” felt they needed to see the conspiracy through, you know, on principle? what say ye, birthers?

Drawing Black Lines

July 26th, 2010
1:55 pm

CT—

I actually agree with you on this point. The “Birther Movement” stretches credulity. Besides there are more substantive reasons Obama should not be president.

Drawing Black Lines

July 26th, 2010
1:56 pm

BTW

“loon”?? If I didn’t know you better, I would think you frequently watch O’Reilly.

Granny Godzilla

July 26th, 2010
1:58 pm

kayaker 71 – YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE CUTE!

not my problem – yours.

it would not be an election year without the publication of things that
might damage chances of election. correct things, rumor things
and lie things too. that’s what “oppo” is for.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
2:01 pm

Good Grief, I don’t know, “what does a person’s religion have to do with this?” see if you can follow this. the right (especially the Beck’s, Hannity’s, Palin’s and Limbaugh’s) love to extrapolate, or what Dr. Phil and his crowd call; “assign motive to behavior”. They disagree with Obama’s policies or the left’s agenda, and they immediately “assign a motive” (socialism, Muslim mole, hates America, etc.). the right is the side that infuses religion; specially a particulary conservative, skewed; some would call it “flat earth” brand of Christianity. and they do so for the purpose of assuming moral “high ground” or to denegrated anyone who “does not look, think or act” as they do (because their thoughts, appearances and actions come from the Bible). so, if we can agree that the Bible is off the table (evolution trumps creationism, gays are people too, etc.) then maybe we can get to the bottom of this birth certificate silliness.

Mike K.

July 26th, 2010
2:06 pm

@neo-Carlinist
I think you’re being far too easy on the NYT. This argument is an example of an old, journalistic trick to appear unbiased by “reporting” someone’s opinion. Since the NYT only has so much space for print, normally, the academic musings of an obscure law professor would not make it into the paper. Moreover, the NYT ran not one, but two articles about this supposed “issue”. If that’s not liberal bias, I don’t know what is.

Recovered Demoholic

July 26th, 2010
2:10 pm

Earlier today, I was reading how the journOlist had discussed Sarah Palin, Trig, et al, and considered how to embarrass and negate her by asking for birth certificates and hospital records. Tsk-tsk.

Why are all of ObaMao’s records, transcripts, papers, etc. hidden?

Cynthia Tucker, were you a member of the journOlist?

Thomas

July 26th, 2010
2:10 pm

NC- your one sided attack of the right is laughable at best- as a centrist the world is indeed round and the far right and the far left have so much in common. Don’t like Bush’s war policy- you are not a patriot. Don’t like Obama’s policy- you are against the poor and needy somehow.

Good Grief

July 26th, 2010
2:17 pm

@neo-Carlinist
“…so, if we can agree that the Bible is off the table…”

I’m not trying to insult your intelligence, nor to assume a superior position, but I think it’s a naive argument to say we should take the Bible off the table. I wouldn’t expect a Bible-believer to remove the Bible from their outlook, just as I would not expect a Muslim to remove the Quran, or a Jew to disregard the Torah.

From my point of view (centrist-Libertarian), I see the far right infusing their argument with religion and forced morality, and I see the far left infusing their argument with “social justice,” “gender equality”, and political correctness. Unfortunately, neither version offers a path to true political discussion and debate.

The right cites the Bible as a source for their argument. The left mocks the right for having to seek a god. The left then cites political correctness as a source for their action. The right mocks the left for seeking not to offend anyone.

I’ve always said, wth certain liberals “Thou shalt not kill” is wrong and shouldn’t be allowed, but “Don’t kill anyone” is okay. it’s all a matter of semantics.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
2:18 pm

Mike K., if you want “unbiased reporting” you need to move to Saudi Arabia or Iran or North Korea. The article itself was not “the academic musings of an obscure law professor” – and, he Chen’s was not the only legal opinion cited (other “law professors” were queried). I am not responsible (nor is the New York Times) for what you “know” or do not know about “liberal bias”. So let me get this straight – at the time (February 2008), McCain was not even the GOP nominee. The Times ran two “biased” articles, which had absolutely NO impact on McCain’s candidacy, as he obviously survived these aggregious, malicious attacks and emerged victorious. Methinks you care giving too much power to MSM (or the liberal media hacks at the NY Times).

Thomas

July 26th, 2010
2:25 pm

I am a fan of good grief charlie brown- wouldn’t it be nice for everyone to take a deep breath and walk through the issues pragmatically leaving as much of the insults and emotion at home as possible? Shouldn’t everyone think that if at least half the folks in the world disagree with me they may just have a point. anyways-

left wing

July 26th, 2010
2:26 pm

Good Grief @ 12:53 – the correct term should be ‘far right whackos’. Sorry about any misunderstanding.

In fact, Hawaii’s Republican govenor has said that President Obama’s birth certificate is real, something that the (and I want to use the term correctly) right wing whackos refuse to believe:
usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-07-27-obama-hawaii_N.htm
Good Grief I don’t consider all conservatives whackos. I have friends who are conservative (my brother’s one, but we don’t talk about him much) that have different ideas about economic growth, etc. There are extremists on both ends of the spectrum. It’s just that my end hugs trees and your end is sitting in the woods with guns waiting for the chance when civilization falters. Which one is worse?
Every side has family members they’re not particularly proud of. Jimmy Carter has Billy. Jeb Bush has George W. And I’ve got my brother. We all learn to deal with it.

neo-Carlinist

July 26th, 2010
2:28 pm

Good Grief, very simple; do you celebrate Christmas? Is Santa Claus a part of your Christmas narrative? If so, great. Your first paragraph calls into question you claim to be a libertarian/centrist. You do realize that the Q’ran is very much “on the table” in Pakistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, and it was something of a thorn in America’s side when it was “on the table” in Afgahnistan (see: Taliban). Please don’t worry about insulting my intelligence. I am more concerned about the snake jugglers and theocrats who embrace “faith” at the expense of “intelligence” or critical thinking. in fact, what is one of the most common epithets hurled from the right (especially the religious right)? “you’re a pointed headed intellectual”. And I would argue that the “kooks” on the left who seek “social justice” are just as delusional as those who believe the earth is 10,000 years old and Adam and Eve were the first two humans.