Club for Growth Loves…Buck’s Plan To…Oh, Nevermind

MONDAY UPDATE: Don’t look now, folks, but the Club for Growth appears to have quietly made a certain bullet point vanish from Ken Buck’s endorsement over the weekend. The Buckpedaling continues! Round and round and round he goes! What does Buck really believe in? Nobody knows!

With apologies to Al Gore, it looks like Buck’s support for eliminating the Department of Education has become an “inconvenient truth.” We don’t think, however, that this change on the Club for Growth’s endorsement page (original text after the jump) accomplishes much besides making it look even worse–the confusion gave inquisitive readers ample time to confirm what Buck has actually said, and it’s not ambiguous in the least. Original post follows, you meddling kids!

There seems to be some confusion out there about the precise position of GOP Senate nominee Ken Buck with regard to the federal Department of Education. As most of you know, Buck’s primary opponent Jane Norton came out early and strongly for the wholesale abolition of the Department of Education–this turned into fairly negative press coverage for Norton, and in the days since Buck defeated Norton, Buck’s supporters have put great emphasis on his allegedly more nuanced view. Supposedly, Buck has gone on record in favor of ‘major cuts’ to the Department of Education, but as supporters strain to point out post-primary, not its elimination.

Well, somebody should probably tell this to the stridently conservative Club for Growth, which lists abolishing the Department of Education as one of the, you know, reasons they’ve endorsed him.

Where do you think they got that idea? This probably explains where the New York Times got it, anyway. Now, maybe it’s due for a correction, or maybe what we’re seeing here is a case of telling too many people too many contradictory things…depending on what they want to hear? We’re not privy to whatever interaction with the Club for Growth that led them to put this bullet point on their endorsement of Buck–we can only tell you what appears on their website as of this writing.

In other news, we have a winner from our poll a few days ago. “Buck-pedaling.”

109 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Middle of the Road says:

    He’s full of what he claims is on his boots.

    In February, at the Teller Tea Party’s Senate forum, he flat out called for its elimination, along with the NEA.

    When asked what government programs the candidates would cut because funding them violates the U.S. Constitution, most agreed to eliminate the Department of Education.

    Buck said that the Department of Education and National Endowment of the Arts could be scratched pronto.

    “We can immediately flip the switch and end them,” declared Buck. “There are other programs that are going to take some time, like student loans, to get rid of.”

    Why backpedal towards the middle when this is precisely why your base voted for you over Norton?

  2. marilou says:

    Why don’t you go ask him before you spread untrue rumors?  I’ve heard Ken Buck’s position directly from Ken Buck and it is not near NYT or Club for Growth.

    • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

      Perhaps he was not being entirely honest with you.

      • MADCO says:

        See, in primary season, it’s one thing.  In the general, it’s something else.

        When he thinks we want to hear X, Y, Z. He says Well, heck, X for sure, I got bullshit on my boots, so you know Y  and, of course,  certainly Z,

        But then when he realizes we want to hear something else he  says – What I meant all along was something else.

        • Bennet is running for the middle, same as Buck. What’s ok for Bennet is wrong for Buck?

          Everyone knows the game that’s being played here.

          • What really bugs me about Buck is that he makes a big deal about issues a Senator can do nothing about.

            A balanced budget Amendment will pass after Yogi Berra bats 1000 in 2014.

            ObamaCare will be repealed after Republicans elect Sarah Palin President with 70 GOP U.S. Senators.

            Buck will vote against having the Feds fully fund a North-South Interstate east of Denver if the bill includes a tax increase.

            I wish he’d talk about real issues in language that shows he wants to do something for Colorado and America, not just make Jim DeMint president.

          • catpuzzle says:

            Bennet caught some flack for this at times in the primary (see… crazy shit from Wade Norris, for example) but he’s the real deal.

            He was the guy that balanced the budget in Denver, not Hick. And I think they did it by cutting a lot of spending, not with new taxes.

            Background shows he understands how budgets work. As far as I understand it, the only budget Buck has ever had was his budget at the DA’s office, and that went up substantially? At least according to what Norton said, which I assume has some some basis fact?

    • ss says:

      The post is talking about how Club for Growth is saying that Buck is for eliminating the Department of Education. Which according to MOTR is exactly what Buck said.

      I hope that this politician was not saying one thing to you and another thing to a different group, that would be unheard of.

    • BlueCat says:

      for a tape or transcript of the quote?

      “We can immediately flip the switch and end them,” declared Buck. “There are other programs that are going to take some time, like student loans, to get rid of.”

      • BlueCat says:

        You aren’t big on links, such as the one MOTR provided, or concrete primary sources. You prefer we rely on what somebody (as long as it isn’t any stinking liberal somebody) says they heard or read in a forwarded e-mail. No need for anything facty.

      • butterfly says:

        “There are other programs that are going to take some time, like student loans, to get rid of.”

        Why are Republicans afraid of people getting an education?  They are afraid that they might start thinking?

        Scary thing, education!

        • Gilpin GuyGilpin Guy says:

          If you are interested in preserving an aristocracy rather than promoting a meritocracy then you only want to educate the offspring of the elites and make sure to keep everyone else in the peasant class.  Good for cannon fodder and being servants.  Education of the masses works against the privileges of the wealthy.  Republicans worship the wealthy and want to preserve their privileges at all costs.  ”Off with their student loans” quoth Ken Buck.  

          • butterfly says:

            I guess I could have added /snark to my comment.  

            You are right GG and well said. Now I hope that they read my comment after your entry since your entry says it all!

            I was hoping to wake others up to this aspect of the Republican agenda!

    • GOPwarrior says:

      They are just mad because they know Buck is going to win and they feel powerless for the first time since this blog existed, after the Dhimmicrats putsched Colorado.

      It’s going to be a LONG SIX YEARS, Pols!

      • Gilpin GuyGilpin Guy says:

        so having another good old boy, conservative dullard who doesn’t understand government or how to get things done isn’t going to be a shock to anyone if it comes to that.

        It’s a pity that the American people still fall for the “Golly gosh I’m pleased as punch to vote to protect the wealthy” crap by these hucksters but that’s politics.

  3. Ray SpringfieldRay Springfield says:

    I doubt that he favors cutting subsidizing Halliburton

  4. Cordelia Chase says:

    I mean, Department of Education, Department of Energy. Both start with an E.  Both are crazy left socialist liberal departments trying to take away our personal freedoms and tax dollars. Buck said to eliminate one (energy) but people heard the other (education).  

     

  5. MADCO says:

    4 minutes on google

    “ken buck” “education department”

    all bolding mine

    1) HuffPo

    Buck’s been a vocal critic of the Department of Education, arguing that policy decisions in this field should be left to local politicians. “We need to get the federal government out of education,” he once declared.

    2) Politico

    Throw in a call to scrap the Department of Education and Buck’s support for “birther” legislation in response to a minority that fears President Barack Obama isn’t an American citizen, …

    3) The Washington Post

    For example, Buck supports the elimination of certain federal agencies; he said that the Department of Education should be “immediately reduced,” and that completely eliminating the department is “something we have to consider.”

    4) The Statesman

    Most appealing to Hotchkiss was Buck’s statement that the Department of Education is unnecessary and most of its functions are better performed by states.

    We need to get the federal government out of education,” Buck declared.

    5) Statesman again

    When asked what government programs the candidates would cut because funding them violates the U.S. Constitution, most agreed to eliminate the Department of Education.

    Buck said that the Department of Education and National Endowment of the Arts could be scratched pronto.

    Here’s the part I don’t get.

    He won with this kind of rhetoric. Why back off now? Team Maes and Team Tancredo are with him on this.  So is Team Norton.

    So it’s just Bennet.

    * I see Joe having a conversation about  policy or decision, and trying to use his King-Fu grip on his iPhone to look it up on the goggle and then saying “the google is hard” and blowing up his iPhone.

    • BlueCat says:

      Either Buck wasn’t being completely honest with marilou or all of these sources are lying or he lied to everyone but marilou. And of course according to marilou we’re all stupid for not just taking the word of someone who claims to have heard something from somebody. Sounds like the usual rightie method for finding info good enough to swear by to me. That and having strangers hand you portfolios or watching Glen Beck draw lines or getting a forwarded e-mail from your tea party friends.  So there you go.  Ignore all the above on marilou’s say so or we’re all idiots.  

  6. Go Blue says:

    I foresee a “Both-Ways-Buck” campaign in the future. He’s proving to be more two-faced than the last two Bobs combined.

    Good work Colorado GOP!  

  7. Half Glass FullHalf Glass Full says:

    Abortion. He’ll try to edge back from the Personhood Amendment and wanting to ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest. He’ll try to say something to sound less extreme while at the same time keeping his base happy. Nice trick if he can manage that.

  8. Even Bennet, wasn’t he like Super of DPS, doesn’t get it.

    “No Child Left Behind” has to go, period.

    There are days I wish Dixie Lee Ray was around. I was against DOE (Department of Energy) funding HGP (Human Genome Project), but I worked at Palo Verde (Largest Nuke Plant in Free World), so I would beg to differ.

    Keep the DOE, but like all government agencies streamline the regulatory process, rule making and push for cooperative government.

    Same goes for Dept of Education.

    You see, the problem with the DEMS and the REP is they see 2/3rds of the budget as being “Entitlements,” and they just hack and cut away and attempt to tell the American public that they won’t, which they did and will do.

    So, for Buck, what doesn’t have to go?

    Me? I never been in politics, I figure it would serve everyone better to save money by cutting fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement, then throwing “the baby out with the bathwater.”

    Anyone seen Bennet, on the western slope they think hes in some DEM bunker, is he?

    So is there ever gonna be a Buck n’ Bennet debate? Next week, I think I will challenge again, I like the idea of 16th Street Mall, in the middle of the middle?

    Any comments?

    • marilou says:

      We always hear about that but it never happens.  Every year, there is $60 billion fraud and waste in Medicare.

      The only way to cut fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement is to allow the federal government to manage less thereby lessening the occurrence of fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement.

      Read the Constitution and then put the feds in charge of only those designated functions as enumerated.

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        but if you’re going to insinuate that there’s less fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the private sector, or that the private sector would do better with public monies in providing services, I’m not going to have any more sympathy for any if your dumbass family.

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        that $60 billion dollar per year figure — I’m just guessing here,  but did you pull that out of the bottom of one of little Beegey’s diapers?

      • ClubTwitty says:

        Ask Bushie’s #1 buddy Ken Lay (RIP).

      • ClubTwitty says:

        Afterall, it is a different state and nothing in the enumerated powers specifies  eggs OR food safety.

        Now some people might believe that Congress’ authority to regulate interstate commerce would apply–silly socialist fascist collectivist progressive liberals!!!!  

        Point me to where any poultry products are mentioned by our Founding Fathers!!!!

        (But if the interstate commerce clause DID apply…then you must also favor banning any out-of-state students from attending any Colorado schools, lest we have to acknowledge that a service is being traded across state lines…)  

        • MADCO says:

          But I read it again today just because.

          And nowhere, and I mean not the original, not the amendments, not the pamphlets, not in letters to the editor – nowhere do any of the founders say anything about tainted eggs.

          So  - let the free market work it’s magic.  When enough people get sick or die, the rest of us will figure it out and stop buying eggs.  Of course, then I’ll have to keep all my chickens for eggs and stop going to the dr.  But I’ll have leaned a valuable lessen.

      • agree,

        Lets take Medicare (leaving out medicaid), $60 billion is prob. conservative.

        So, whats the solution?

        #1. Remove all “illegals” from all services that are not strictly “life saving,” or mandated by the US Supreme Court, which could not be satisfied by legislation.

        #2. ICD-11

        #3. EMF & Bar Coding

        This saves hundreds of billions.

        My answer is simple, but no one is going to like it. Enforce strict adherence to current federal laws, as an example, such as that accomplished during the “55 MPH” legislation days.

        I guess repatriation will have to occur with the 500,000 or so Illegals we are feeding in our prisons, otherwise, I don’t want to spend one penny more on supporting what is “Illegal,” period, so please stop referring to me as “Tancredo Lite.”

  9. Laughing Boy says:

    What was the nationwide graduation rate pre-DoEd?

    What is it now?

    Just saying, that $75 billion might be better spent on munitions.

    :)

    • Can someone tell me what they see in this link. regarding Obama’s new plan changes to “No Child Left Behind.”

      http://www2.ed.gov/policy/else

      Why, I mention 1980, and I really don’t want to say the “illegals” are the problem with our Public Education system, and that President Reagan is at fault, no I wont go there.

      Its a toggle point where I think the DoEd had a huge admin now its 1/2 that and 1% of discretionary spending, heck that 10% carrot they dangle at the states isn’t worth No Child Left behind. It has to go.

      The DoEd can stay minus some bad programs.

      What about that “Dream Act” while we are on the subject..

    • marilou says:

      have been spent since ESEA in 1965 and there is nothing to show for it.  In fact, there is  too much money for experimentation instead of teaching kids to read, write and do math.  Close the Department of Education, return student lending to the private sector, and if schools want to experiment and waste money, let them raise it themselves.

      • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

        You, yesterday:

        Show me where Ken Buck has ever said he favors abolishing the Department of Education…

        You, today:

        Close the Department of Education…

        Checked in with the mothership, did you?

    • b52bomberguy says:

      Unfortunately, I give you credit for something is that is so ridiculous. To have that much money spent, and NOTHING to show for it? How do liberals defend such waste?

      • ClubTwitty says:

        Oh wait, that was when you guys were in charge, handing it over to war lords, enemies, and corporate mercenaries.  I would favor spending my taxes on education any day than corporate GOP-abetted graft.  

  10. b52bomberguy says:

    …why would it be such a bad thing to eliminate the Dept of Education? Why do they really do anyways? The department was created under Carter. States, more specifically, local school districts control public school funding via property taxes. So, what does the Dept of Education do to help local communities. Under President Obama, he has nationalized the school loan programs, eliminating thousands of jobs out West for loan companies. (http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/20/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-opinions-columnists-lee-sheppard.html?boxes=Homepagechannels) It’s not the government’s job to loan money to students so they can get an education. YOU, as an INDIVIDUAL, decide if you want to go to school. So, if you want to do something, you need to pay for it. Quite simple. So, again, I ask, why do we even have a Dept. of Education?

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      The better educated the workforce, the more productive the country. At the end of WWII South Korea and Taiwan had a per-capita production at the same level as Afghanistan. They put every penny into education and it brought them to 1st world status.

      When you and your ilk propose defunding education, you are proposing to push us to 2nd and eventually 3rd world status. The educational level of the workforce matters more than anything else today.

      Now how best to apply those public funds, that’s a very interesting question. But reducing or eliminating funding for education – that will turn us into Somalia.

      • H-man says:

        It is in the government’s interest that we have an educated work force.  That said, there is little price competition in higher education in large part because of our education loan system.   Does the country need to subsidize more liberal arts education?  Even as a liberal arts undergrad guy, I am hard pressed to see why we have a one size fits all approach.  Perhaps we shift to a more focused, science, technology major driven approach.

        One of the consequences of the lack of price competition is a very high education cost inflation rate compared to inflation as a whole.  I am not sure of the solution, but I am sure of the reality of the problem.

        • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

          I would like to see C.U. or C.S.U. speak to what is better there since 1981 that we are getting for the twice the rate of inflation cost increase since then. (Note – cost, not tuition. Cost eliminates the differences in state support.)

        • Gilpin GuyGilpin Guy says:

          is on the Senate Education committee and he is in the forefront of creating new educational opportunities that are freed of the traditional classroom approach.  Classrooms of the future might just be sophisticated chat rooms and online learning multimedia environments.

          Instead of a crazy Tea Party extremist in Ken Buck who is kowtowing to the even more radical fringe in his political party, we already have a senator who is up to speed on the educational challenges facing our country in the 21st century.

          Michael Bennet is the logical choice if we are serious about educational reform to met the challenges of worldwide competition in the 21st century.

          • H-man says:

            1) an amazing ability to spend a lot of money in a short period of time;

            2) an uncanny ability to not take positions on issues so that he can lead everyone to believe that he supports their position without ever taking one of is own; and

            3) the ability to get appointed to things for which he has not demonstrated a talent.

            On the Education committee front what exactly would you recommend that he has done and two, how is it to be paid for?

    • parsingreality says:

      ..Do I detect a military career?  Did that damned government ever send you to school on the taxpayer’s dime?  Ever get to use any of the GI Bill education “rights?”

      Jus’ asking, ya know?

  11. Barron X says:

    .

    No mention of Grover Norquist.  I thought he was affiliated with Club for Growth; guess not.

    Of course Terry Considine and Lawrence Kudlow are on the “Leadership Council.”  

    Pat Toomey is getting support from their PAC.  I thought he was an employee of theirs.  

    Doug Lamborn is ranked #16 in their “Power Ranking.”  No PAC support.

    .

  12. bjwilson83 says:

    Nice try on that one. They obviously removed it because the information was incorrect.

  13. GOPwarrior says:

    As far as I am concerned, Ken has already won over the people who matter. He can moderate now to appease the sheeple, and you liberals can seethe all the way to Senator Buck’s swearing in!

    You can’t stop us and every poll says so

    • BlueCat says:

      I think the Rasmussen might even show a point beyond margin of error for Buck and we’re what? Over two months out now?.  Wonder what happened to  the Romanoff’s big surge into frontrunner position going into the final leg of the primary? Guess not bothering to vote because it was so hopeless wouldn’t have  been the smartest thing for Bennet supporters to do then.  We sure aren’t going to do that now.  Especially since we all know now what a great finisher Bennet is.

      And nice to know how you feel about the non-Republican majority of state voters. As if we didn’t know how the GOP views the electorate already.  The “sheeple” just may surprise you, GOPblatherer.

  14. catpuzzle says:

    I’m sure his handlers saw this and had the club take it down immediately?

    But what ever gave the club the idea that he supported it? O, probably just the fact that…you know…he said it?

    We can’t trust him on this because…he said it.

    We can’t trust him on the 17th amendment because…he said he’d repeal it.

    We can’t trust him on the budget because… he has a big spending record.

    Etc… the list goes on and on and I’m sure everyone has their own addition to it, but the reality is the same. Norton said it all the time, its’ a trust issue with Buck.  

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.