world

Trump says rival Carson needs to explain recollections

76 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2015.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

76 Comments
Login to comment

These recollections are totally true. I recall something similar happening when we worked together as grain sifters in an Egyptian pyramid. This was back before I was born, so I may be a little fuzzy on the details.

18 ( +19 / -1 )

Carson needs to explain alot more than just the West Point story.

Say what you will about Trump's ego, but at least Trump doesn't commission paintings of himself sitting together with Jesus

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Carson said on NBC that he thought he was being targeted “because I’m a threat, to the progressives, to the secular progressive movement in this country ...

You're a target because you're running for president and you've gone on record saying some sensational things, like trying to stab a family member. If you don't like scrutiny then don't throw information out there. People have every right to listen to what you say and make their own opinions and it has nothing to do with the media.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

True SuperLib but it is a concern when the media bias is concerned.

I tend to agree with Carson in that his trustability if way ahead of Hillary's and has risen to a front runner for the Republican Party while Hillary suffers serious trustability poll result.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

"Questions about (Dr.) Carson’s account of the West Point scholarship came to the fore last week after a report by political news website Politico on differing accounts of the scholarship."

Which Politico now fully admits fabricating its slanderous hit piece on Dr. Carson.

As an independent who both parties are trying to win my vote, one question: Why did the MSM fail to fully vet Obama, a politician from Chicago who did not have enough management experience to even operate a lemonade stand but was was able to get his travel, school, medical and criminal records sealed all with the DNC's super PAC -- the leftist media machine's -- blessings.

This level of double standards leave independents like myself concerned about getting the truth from the U.S. media.

On a related note, Dr. Carson has so far collected more than $3.5 million in donations since Politico's hatchet job first broke. It is encouraging to see the leftist media's latest attempt to smear a black man blew up in their faces.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

It's pretty crazy to see Republicans here bitching about Carson's coverage when a very large chuck of them think Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Quite an exaggeration SuperLib or is your bubble so small.

Texas Aggie.....the MSM must be racist to smear Carson the way they try.

Carson is a spiritual man, why do so many liberal have a problem with that? I think the foundation of spiritual morals are what has made the planet grow to this point. W/O them we see chaos in individuals. And I'm non-spiritual! Yes, I believe in evolution and we are animals also just the alpha animal which developed to this point. Religious morals keep most of us in line. The anti religion movement is harmful in my opinion.

-13 ( +1 / -14 )

Carson is a spiritual man, why do so many liberal have a problem with that?

The problem isn't with his spirituality, it's with his belief in things like the world is only 6000 years old, and that the pyramids were created to store grain for Joseph, a fictional character, rather than the pharoahs remains - who were real.

It's ok to be religious, it's not ok to be ignorant of facts.

15 ( +16 / -1 )

So many people are ignorant of facts. I think it sill to believe pyramids were grain storage but that's harmless. To think increasing corporate tax rates in USA is damaging. To believe the world is 6000 years old is silly to me and harmless. And has he said those exact words? To believe illegal immigration should be forgiven has repercussions.

The key point is what impact certain 'facts' have over fiction. As for the pyramids....we don't have all the facts. The origin of humans.....we don't have all the facts. Heck we don't even have all the facts from 150 years ago. Let alone thousands!

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

@MarkG Quite an exaggeration SuperLib or is your bubble so small.

If you're referring to this quote:

a very large chuck of them think Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya.

I encourage you to read this:

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/facts-figures-43-percent-of-republicans-think-obama-is-muslim/?_r=0

8 ( +8 / -0 )

I think it sill to believe pyramids were grain storage but that's harmless.

The belief itself is harmless, but having someone who lacks the intelligence to be able to differentiate reality (fact) from belief (religion) in charge of the most powerful country in the world is a scary thought.

If he were trying to become the leader of a soccer team, then his comments wouldn't disqualify him whatsoever. But he's trying to become the president of the USA - this requires an entirely higher standard of qualifications, and he doesn't have them.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

You're a target because you're running for president and you've gone on record saying some sensational things, like trying to stab a family member. If you don't like scrutiny then don't throw information out there. People have every right to listen to what you say and make their own opinions and it has nothing to do with the media.

And now you know why so many people distrust Hillary. Sure, I think Carson needs to clarify these accounts, but he's human and we all say things, the man is not perfect. Even Bernie Sanders thought this is a waste of time to scrutinize Carson like this, we have other serious issues and they want to focus on his faith or something that he did 30 or 40 years ago?? This is just insane. But when the shoe is on the other foot, libs become enraged and call foul.

It's pretty crazy to see Republicans here bitching about Carson's coverage when a very large chuck of them think Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya.

When it comes to Obama since he's the president, based on his actions over the last 7 years, one might think, just might think......

It's ok to be religious, it's not ok to be ignorant of facts.

Then let him, it's his choice. I thought as a free nation we had the right to believe and say what we want?

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

It's ok to be religious, it's not ok to be ignorant of facts.

Then let him, it's his choice. I thought as a free nation we had the right to believe and say what we want?

I'll rephrase my comment:

It's ok to be the president and be religious. It's not ok to be the president and ignorant of facts.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

'It's ok to be religious, it's not ok to be ignorant of facts.'

'Then let him, it's his choice. I thought as a free nation we had the right to believe and say what we want?'

So, you'd be okay with a president who believed the Colosseum was a baseball stadium and that the world is resting on the back of a giant tortoise? That is pretty much the level of barking mad nonsense Carson is spouting.

You're a business owner. Would you employ someone who said those things at a job interview?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

We'll never know all the facts from anyone. Especially Hillary!

Carson seem to be the analytical type. Trump emotional type. Hillary the blow with the wind type.

The nominees will be interesting. Hillary is on the edge of indictment. The GOP has a collection. Sanders is too radical. That said who will the running mates be? The Dems are pushing 70+ The GOP fares better with selection.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

It's ok to be the president and be religious. It's not ok to be the president and ignorant of facts

And that's his choice. The man has the right to think whatever he wants whether you or I think it's ignorant or not.

So, you'd be okay with a president who believed the Colosseum was a baseball stadium and that the world is resting on the back of a giant tortoise?

As long as he governs according to the constitution and puts the country first, I could care less.

That is pretty much the level of barking mad nonsense Carson is spouting.

After 7 years of Obama, I sincerely doubt anyone can top the nuttiness insane nonesense he's wrought on the country.

You're a business owner. Would you employ someone who said those things at a job interview?

I've hired crazier thinking than that. As long as my employees do a fantastic job, I don't care, none of my business. Bernie is right, focus on the issues that truly matter, listen to what the candidates want to do and their solutions for the country, not what they said in the past or what they believe in.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

This is the left's usual MO anytime a black person chooses to leave the democrat plantation: They sic their DNC Super PAC German shepards -- the liberal MSM -- on them to try and destroy them.

"I encourage you to read this:

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/facts-figures-43-percent-of-republicans-think-obama-is-muslim/?_r=0"

Heh, a DNC Super PAC citing a poll conducted by another DNC Super PAC. Classic . . . .

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

And that's his choice. The man has the right to think whatever he wants whether you or I think it's ignorant or not.

I haven't claimed otherwise. So you seem to be arguing against something I haven't said.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

I haven't claimed otherwise. So you seem to be arguing against something I haven't said.

So we really don't need to make wind of what or how Carson thinks. It's really irrelevant.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

@Texas A

Here's another poll from a group you might find fits your Weltanschauung.

http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/08/shock-poll-only-29-of-republicans-said.html

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@PT

You do know that it was supporters of Mrs. Bill Clinton who first floated that trial balloon the last time she tried to get the Democratic Party nomination in 2008 . . . .

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

@Texas ou do know that it was supporters of Mrs. Bill Clinton who first floated that trial balloon the last time she tried to get the Democratic Party nomination in 2008 . . .

Is your point that Republicans believe Clinton supporters?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@Bass You are very nonjudgmental. As you said, you could care less about personal beliefs. So, you'd have no problem with a Satanist president as long as he or she vowed to leave those beliefs at the door when making decisions? How about a belief in fairies or alchemy? How about a white or a black supremacist who vowed to keep those ideas out of decision-making?

Could you care less about any of the above? I regard the cracked ideas I listed above at a similar level to a belief in a 6,000-year-old earth.

Oh, yes. Given your anger about the war on Christmas, how about an atheist who believed religion to be corrosive and immoral and refused to swear in on a bible? Do you think the US right, which you claim is less judgmental and more tolerant than the left, would be just fine with that?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

@PT

No. The point is it is the regressives who first pro-offered that opinion.

That written, it is kinda hard not to believe that when:

The Chicago Sun-Times referred to Obama as a "Kenya born state senator";

Or, Obama "wrote" in one of his books:

"When the winds of change blows against Muslims, I will stand with Islam ",

Or, has said things like:

"My Muslim religion"

Or,

"The most beautiful sound in the world is the Muslim call to prayer."

These are just a ifew instances of things that were never questioned/challenged by the DNC Super PAC, the U.S. leftist news media machine.

Meanwhile, Dr. Carson being questioned about being offered a scholarship to West Point -- in a hit job that has since been retracted by Politico more than a week ago but is still referred to in this article -- is an example of the double standard employed by the U.S. liberal media; aka, the DNC Super PAC . . . .

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Dr. Carson's whacked out religious beliefs absolutely do inform his political beliefs and the actions he'd take as president. That's a lot of the charm of any of these guys and why we haven't had a major political candidate to date stand up and say, "Well, I'm an atheist." They all attend church regularly. The American people tend to demand that, and most of the GOP base want someone with a strong Evangelical background to turn back the clock on reproductive and LGBT rights. Oh, and put prayer back in schools and get that nasty evolution scary stuff out of there or at least much it up with a lot of creation "science." You could probably separate Donald Trump's religious beliefs from his platform, but the rest of the pack are very nearly as delusional as Dr. Carson and run with their bibles on their chests. So don't play this disingenuous game of "His religious beliefs don't matter." You're not fooling anyone. Or at least you're not fooling anyone as much as Dr. Carson is himself with his cognitive dissonance.

Oh, and yes, I agree he has the right to believe what he wants under the First Amendment. I also have the right to believe his espousing a lot of complete craziness disqualifies him as a viable candidate for president. It informs his political views and those also make him a poor choice.

As for his West Point statements-- whether or not he flat-out lied, he's left some implications there and even his explanation has shown a weasel-worded dishonesty. I'll give him a pass on the "scholarship" thing because that's only an imprecise way of saying, "I was in if I wanted it."

And I'm not playing your Hillary Clinton false-equivalence game. I remember when you guys were convinced she had Vince Foster murdered. Republicans-- especially male ones-- have been champing at the bit to drag her down ever since she and Bill first appeared on the scene and she's whipped you at every single juncture. You have nothing. Absolutely nothing. Except your frothing hatred.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@Texas

I can remember the president hosting dinners for Muslim holy days and visiting mosques.

I can also remember quotes like "The English translation is not as eloquent as the original Arabic" which seemed to display a long study of Arabic and the Koran. How else could he make such a judgement?

He also said "But let me quote from the Koran itself: In the long run, evil in the extreme will be the end of those who do evil. For that they rejected the signs of Allah". Rejecting Allah....

Finally, in a statement which clearly indicates a belief in the truth of the revelation to Mohammed, the president said "And Ramadan commemorates the revelation of God's word in the Holy Koran to the Prophet Mohammed". That's pretty conclusive. Christians don't accept the revelation to Mohammed.

The president I'm talking about is George W. Bush.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

So we really don't need to make wind of what or how Carson thinks. It's really irrelevant.

Sure we do - the man has shown he lacks the intellectual capacity to be an effective president.

The president I'm talking about is George W. Bush.

Hehehehehe

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The fact that many Republicans claim what a candidate thinks is irrelevant to their qualifications is another glaring example of their bankruptcy as a party. Science, for example, underpins policy regarding regulations of emissions; get that wrong and you get the policy wrong. Geopolitics, as another example, underpins policy regarding relations between nations; believe that Israel is key to some "End of Times" prophecy, and you're likely to screw up things big-time.

The list goes on. Carson is clearly unqualified for any political position, much less president. It seems like the GOP must go through this every election cycle. Remember that darling of yesteryear, onetime GOP front-runner Michele Bachmann? She's pretty sure Jesus' return is imminent. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michele-bachmann-jesus-is-coming-soon_563fd10fe4b0b24aee4ab948 Carson will soon be relegated to her rank, and all of his current supporters WOULD be left feeling quite foolish if they had any ability to learn from their mistakes.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Carson, 64, a retired neurosurgeon, said he thought he was being singled out and vetted by the media in a way that other presidential candidates had not been. “Not like this, I have never seen this before, and many other people who are politically experienced tell me they have never seen it before,” Carson said in an interview...

Maybe it's your complete lack of political experience? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to figure that one out. He and Trump have zero experience governing, immediately aim for the highest office, and expect people to just hand it to them?

For a party that accuses their opponents of being weak, Republicans sure whine a lot about simple questions. I have nothing against political outsiders, but if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

MrBum: He and Trump have zero experience governing, immediately aim for the highest office, and expect people to just hand it to them?

Worked for Obama, and working for Ms. Clinton.

What had they governed prior to running for President? College newspaper? Senate offices?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Was the greatest Republican of all, Abraham Lincoln, a governor? I thought not.

Newbie politicians have not really been tested in their broad reaching political acumen. I mean, Ben Carson is letting foreign journalists into his home to take photos of a painting that is so poorly done that some jokers are calling it Klingon Jesus. Then he acts shocked that people are laughing at him, as if he never experienced how intrusive the media can be.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You are very nonjudgmental. As you said, you could care less about personal beliefs. So, you'd have no problem with a Satanist president as long as he or she vowed to leave those beliefs at the door when making decisions?

Stupid analogy, we don't have a Satanist running, I can't entertain that thought because it seems very unlikely that we would ever get one running, so please excuse me for dismissing that question. Let's stay on the reality wave length, please.

How about a belief in fairies or alchemy? How about a white or a black supremacist who vowed to keep those ideas out of decision-making?

No one is running with these ideology backgrounds.

Could you care less about any of the above?

Libs are running away from God, why on Earth would someone want to embrace Satanism??

I regard the cracked ideas I listed above at a similar level to a belief in a 6,000-year-old earth.

And that's your choice.

Oh, yes. Given your anger about the war on Christmas,

Wasn't angry, just perplexed and bewildered, but angry, not really.

how about an atheist who believed religion to be corrosive and immoral and refused to swear in on a bible?

I think that's already been done before.

Do you think the US right, which you claim is less judgmental and more tolerant than the left, would be just fine with that?

For the most part, Yes.

Sure we do - the man has shown he lacks the intellectual capacity to be an effective president.

And look at Obama with his so called education, but lacks the most basic traits of any human and that's common sense, as we are now witnessing over the last 7 years. What a damned nightmare that turned out to be.

The fact that many Republicans claim what a candidate thinks is irrelevant to their qualifications is another glaring example of their bankruptcy as a party.

Who cares, if either party falls in the way of the Dinosaur, might not be such a bad thing.

Science, for example, underpins policy regarding regulations of emissions; get that wrong and you get the policy wrong. Geopolitics, as another example, underpins policy regarding relations between nations; believe that Israel is key to some "End of Times" prophecy, and you're likely to screw up things big-time.

I think unlike Obama, if Carson were president, he would listen to his advisors, so I don't think he would ruffle up too many feathers and he generally cares about the country and the well being of all Americans.

Maybe it's your complete lack of political experience? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to figure that one out. He and Trump have zero experience governing, immediately aim for the highest office, and expect people to just hand it to them?

Obama had NO expierence and we hired him, yes, the country is a big cluster.......

For a party that accuses their opponents of being weak, Republicans sure whine a lot about simple questions.

That's why Hillary won't even allow the press to ask her questions or she won't go on ANY show where she can be challenged? Now that's not only weak, but pathetic as hell!

I have nothing against political outsiders, but if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

Then the same should most definetly apply to the established candidate of either party.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Yes, they were senators. Elected offices tend to have some vetting built into them. And let's face it, Hillary has been on trial since Bill took office. We already know everything about her. Ohhh but the emails you'll cry. It's being investigated, and it looks like at worst she was negligent but not criminally so. That's enough for most people that doesn't already have a bias against her.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Getting the Medal of Freedom from a previous president, as Carson did, is certainly impressive. But it is not a ticket for instant induction to the top civilian post in the country. I mean, the same president (Bush) also gave reformed Watergate felon Chuck Colson the second highest civilian award, and nobody showed enthusiasm for electing Colson as president.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Hillary has been on trial since Bill took office. We already know everything about her.

If we did, she wouldn't be under investigation....again by the FBI.

It's being investigated, and it looks like at worst she was negligent but not criminally so.

No one believes that, especially after Lois Lerner got off without even a citation and unlike Hillary had a mountain of emails, and evidence linking her to the targeting of conservatives, it was all conservatives and the IRS under her leadership did everything they could to hinder and block conservatives taking them out of literally the 2012 election cycle and what makes you think anyone would believe that the same is not happening right now? Thank God the FBI doesn't work for this admin. now that doesn't mean that they won't try to throw salt on the trail. Anyone that shreds emails and refuses to avoid hard questions and not questions that are planned. I'm talking about off the cuff and spontaneous. She will not and that's very telling.

That's enough for most people that doesn't already have a bias against her.

That's purely her own fault.

Getting the Medal of Freedom from a previous president, as Carson did, is certainly impressive. But it is not a ticket for instant induction to the top civilian post in the country.

Exactly, that's why Carson, Hillary and Trump, all smart, but that doesn't qualify none of them a coronation in the White House.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Thank God the FBI doesn't work for this admin. now that doesn't mean that they won't try to throw salt on the trail. >Anyone that shreds emails and refuses to avoid hard questions and not questions that are planned.

I would rather like someone who refuses to avoid hard questions as opposed to someone who avoids them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

...oh, and mathematics. Carson has called for an income tax system based on "tithing" at a flat 10 or 15%. Now, not only is a flat tax terribly regressive, such a level would blow a trillion dollar hole in the budget. Of course, Carson disagrees but refuses to provide details that would back up his claims. Still, that is not much different than any other GOP candidate. They'd do well to replace their party symbol, the elephant, with a magic asterisks.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@Bass

So, you could care less about personal beliefs. It's just that you find extreme Christian views acceptable. That is quite typical of Republicans. This from Gallup:

"Republicans (84%) are significantly more likely than Democrats (66%) to say they will vote for an evangelical candidate. But Democrats are more likely to say they will vote for a Muslim (73%) or an atheist (64%) than are Republicans, of whom less than half say they are willing to vote for a candidate with either of these belief systems."

It seems your 'for the most part' belief about the right not caring about atheism isn't true. They aren't too keen on Muslims either. Carson certainly ticks the evangelical box and his dislike of Islam puts him in good standing with quite a few too. Are you sure the right tends to be more tolerant and less judgemental ( apart from being more likely to accept extreme Christian ideas like Carson's )?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Carson, the first African-American to enter the Republican field for the party’s presidential nomination next year, is a political novice from outside the traditional party system.

Like Trump is a pro? Both of these two, dont think nor act like politicians that everyone has become accustomed to hearing. Neither of them, in my opinion, should ever become president.

The nominees will be interesting. Hillary is on the edge of indictment.

For what?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@bass4funk

If we did, she wouldn't be under investigation....again by the FBI.

Was the FBI involved in all the other investigations too? I know the Republicans were. The investigations that proved nothing and wasted millions on taxpayer money, a fact that you conveniently never acknowledge by the way.

There are actually a lot of questions regarding Hillary, but it's not what the ones Republicans focus on. The real dirt lies in where her donations come from. If you want to know why the Republicans won't touch questionable financial backing with a ten-foot pole, just ask your buddy Trump. That's about the only valid argument he has.

@Laguna

Not only is the math off, it's biblically inaccurate. It turns out the bible's pretty progressive when it comes to taxes and poor people.

http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2015/10/ben_carson_s_tax_plan_is_based_on_the_bible_good_lord.html

I'm not really one for basing fiscal policy on 3,000 year old texts, but if you insist on doing it, at least get it right.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

MrB

I clicked on your link because it reads "ben_carson_s_tax_plan_is_based_on_the_bible_goo" and since I personally find organised religion a steaming load of goo I was interested. Shame.

Y'know we Europeans don't get much right but at least anyone spouting creationist views would be laughed from the room - let alone running for the top job.

The GOP '16 clown car beggars belief.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I don't know about the rest of you, but the deciding factor for me in choosing a president is his/her grasp ancient archeology. I bet Obama is an expert in that too!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

bass4funk: "As long as he governs according to the constitution and puts the country first, I could care less."

Utter BS. If the person were a member of the "Black Lives Matter" movement you would be going ballistic -- errr... you would be "bewildered and perplexed" again. They suddenly WOULDN'T have the right to even think that, and you and Fox would be making up lies about how they murdered police who really committed suicide (then not following up any more), etc.

"If we did, she wouldn't be under investigation"

Yes, she would, because despite you guys losing and declaring her innocent five times already, you still have absolutely nothing else to go on to try and derail her, and certainly nothing of your own to offer by way of plans (except Carson's made up numbers on the economy). After all, as it's been admitted, the Benghazi panel's sole purpose was to take down Hilary Clinton.

"No one is running with these ideology backgrounds."

Doesn't answer the question of if you'd be fine with it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Republicans are saying that if a man stands up and criticizes Obama/Hillary/Democrats it doesn't matter what other silly things he says, Republicans will support him.

It was just so strange to watch Carson get angry that the press vetted his claims of trying to stab someone. He was sitting there saying that if CNN was right then he must be some kind of pathological liar, but they're wrong because he really is an attempted murderer. I was watching that thinking something just isn't right in his head.

I think most Republicans here would agree with that but they are forced to defend him since he's on their team, and they've been trained to think of Democrats as the enemy. Carson is just another "savior". He needs his questionable recollections about his youth to stick since it plays in with his narrative of overcoming adversity through Christ, and that's a big payday for him, literally and figuratively.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Ben Carson is sad to say a tragic example of a smart man who has been brainwashed by his belief structure. A good man. Let him be. Will go away. I loved his bio movie "gifted hands"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ben Carson is sad to say a tragic example of a smart man who has been brainwashed by his belief structure. A good man. Let him be. Will go away.

I appreciate the sentiment but disagree with your conclusion. From what I've read, Carson's belief system (based on his Seventh-Day Adventist leanings) requires a type of catharsis which demonstrates the active hand of God in life. This explains his bizarre insistence on his waywardness as a young man despite all evidence. (Funny that a would-be politician would be all, like, "Dude, I so DID try to kill a man!") Hey, we've all been there, or somewhere close enough that we can empathize.

My problem with your post is the "will go away" part. The guy is clearly a grifter. His past is checkered with business deals that his business manager calls "misunderstandings" - and since when does a surgeon need a business manager? He "halts" his campaign so that he can go on a book tour. It is likely he (and his business manager) hopes as hell not to be elected - a presidential salary is for chumps. But he will not go away. He is Palinesque.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I think it was Herman Cain who was the "first African-American" to run for the GOP nomination.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

kurobune, thanks for mentioning his name. Yes, Cain and Carson, two eccentric brilliant GOP POTUS wannabes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Still, that is not much different than any other GOP candidate. They'd do well to replace their party symbol, the elephant, with a magic asterisks.

How is that different from Hillary being for one thing for many, many years and then when Sanders jumps to the left, she now all of a sudden goes further left of him. Big question mark? Shifting with the winds? This is why she has a credibility problem.

Like Trump is a pro? Both of these two, dont think nor act like politicians that everyone has become accustomed to hearing. Neither of them, in my opinion, should ever become president.

Then who should be president? That would in that case disqualify her as well.

Was the FBI involved in all the other investigations too?

Whitewater.

I know the Republicans were.

They can give congressional hearings, where she can be summoned to testify, but they don't have the authority to investigate her.

The investigations that proved nothing and wasted millions on taxpayer money, a fact that you conveniently never acknowledge by the way.

Bailing out GM, Obamacare, creating a computer system that cost millions of dollars and didn't work and spent millions more fixing it, training Syrian opposition forces and we have about 9 that are somewhat combat ready? Funding the sales of body parts for Planned Parenthood. But wait there's more.....

https://www.nrcc.org/2013/04/15/11-of-the-worst-things-obama-is-wasting-your-tax-dollars-on/

http://www.impeachobamacampaign.com/100-ways-obama-is-wasting-your-money/

And you guys seriously complain about wasted money??? After Dems racking up $20 Trillion debt and still rising.

There are actually a lot of questions regarding Hillary, but it's not what the ones Republicans focus on.

Ok, I will give you that. They should be asking questions about her idea and decisions to oust Gaddafi and Mubarek and how her leadership skills were flawed and as a result some apprehension and caution is paramount in determining how she makes decisions, that's where the focus should have been.

The real dirt lies in where her donations come from. If you want to know why the Republicans won't touch questionable financial backing with a ten-foot pole, just ask your buddy Trump.

Most established Republicans wouldn't touch Trump with a 10ft. pole! Everyone knows what Trump diid, that's not a secret and that's not important because Trump has been pretty open about his financiers and bankruptcies. So already been out.

That's about the only valid argument he has.

And he's still rising in the polls. Imagine that!?

Y'know we Europeans don't get much right but at least anyone spouting creationist views would be laughed from the room - let alone running for the top job.

That's quite alright, you have your culture and we have ours, it's all good.

Yes, she would, because despite you guys losing and declaring her innocent five times already, you still have absolutely nothing else to go on to try and derail her, and certainly nothing of your own to offer by way of plans (except Carson's made up numbers on the economy). After all, as it's been admitted, the Benghazi panel's sole purpose was to take down Hilary Clinton.

Ahhh, no one is buying that BS, but you libs wouldn't do the same? Of course you would and you're doing it now to Trump to Carson and to ANY GOP candidate that is moving up in the polls and is popular with the public. Fair is fair.

Doesn't answer the question of if you'd be fine with it.

And now why would that be?

It was just so strange to watch Carson get angry that the press vetted his claims of trying to stab someone. He was sitting there saying that if CNN was right then he must be some kind of pathological liar, but they're wrong because he really is an attempted murderer. I was watching that thinking something just isn't right in his head.

Then Hillary has absolutely NO hope.

I think most Republicans here would agree with that but they are forced to defend him since he's on their team, and they've been trained to think of Democrats as the enemy.

The same holds true for the Dems in their support for Hillary. Please park the partisan rant.

Carson is just another "savior". He needs his questionable recollections about his youth to stick since it plays in with his narrative of overcoming adversity through Christ, and that's a big payday for him, literally and figuratively.

Nothing wrong with that.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

How could the people who proof read his book and reviewed it let it slide years ago. There no such thing as a "scholarship" to West Point. It is not a private school. If you are nominated and accepted, you are part of the military and everything is provided. Cadets even get a stipend. The fact that he doesn't bother to research the system before making up his story, well that's just lazy.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

How is that different from Hillary being for one thing for many, many years and then when Sanders jumps to the left, she now all of a sudden goes further left of him. Big question mark? Shifting with the winds? This is why she has a credibility problem

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

At least Hillary is not telling how old is the world or telling about Pyramid. She hasn't said she was almost a military cadet either. Thought she ia pretending right to collect more votes.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

All politicians swing in the wind to some extent, but Carson seemed very angry that people didn't believe he tried to stab someone. He will be forgiven by the religious crowd that's he's pandering to, but there aren't enough of them to put him in the White House. I don't see moderate independents flocking to such a strange guy.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

the Washington Post's Janell Ross makes a very salient point. Noting that most of his support comes from conservative, white evangelicals (and not black voters), she observes that Carson represents the ultimate vindication of their thinking about race, religion, and small government. The key passage:

Superlib

I don't see moderate independents flocking to such a strange guy.

Niether do many others. Electoralvote.com:

Carson's up-from-nothing, saved-by-Jesus-and-personal-effort-only story works, primarily with white Republican voters. It works because for some it affirms the conscious or unconscious connections (stereotypes) they draw between blackness, poverty and violence. For others, it demonstrates that Jesus saves. And for others still, it is a narrative that says other, potentially costly social solutions to poverty and violence are not necessary. It says that small government can work.

In other words, supporting Carson is about more than a candidate, it's about an entire political philosophy. Assuming Ross is correct, it means Carson could hang around for a long time, since his supporters will not be quick to abandon such excellent "proof of concept". But it also illustrates why he is extremely unlikely to win the presidency, because this is about all that he represents, and there simply aren't enough voters who think in this way (particularly outside the South) to carry a presidential election.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you make things up and refuse to accept facts?

Because I listen to the facts, not liberal or conservative partisan facts, huge difference.

I'm surprised any of you think he should be....

Sorry, homie, but living in the liberal theoretical paisley unicorn universe scares the crap out of me!

All politicians swing in the wind to some extent, but Carson seemed very angry that people didn't believe he tried to stab someone.

As he should be, but the only thing I fault him for is falling into that trap of the MSM. They do this, bias, highly partisan and he shouldn't react. I mean, look at Hillary, she's the queen the quintessential and the epitome of a lying... and she just shrugs it off as if it's nothing, she's so used to it.

He will be forgiven by the religious crowd that's he's pandering to, but there aren't enough of them to put him in the White House. I don't see moderate independents flocking to such a strange guy.

Hmmmm...that's debatable, compared to Hillary.....oh...

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

@Bass Because I listen to the facts, not liberal or conservative partisan facts, huge difference.

In an earlier post on this thread, you copied links to a US Republican site and one called 'impeachobama'.

As someone who's worked for both NBC and the Washington Post, do you think those sites are not 'liberal or conservative partisan'?

And re MSM, do you consider Fox to be 'not liberal or conservative partisan' and not MSM?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

SuperLib: All politicians swing in the wind to some extent, but Carson seemed very angry that people didn't believe he tried to stab someone.

bass: As he should be, but the only thing I fault him for is falling into that trap of the MSM.

Well I'm sure you fault him for trying to stab someone, too.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Because I listen to the facts, not liberal or conservative partisan facts, huge difference.

Wow, as a prestigious journalist who has worked for the Washington Post and NBC, I would expect you to know that facts are non-partisan and are irrelevant of belief. What you insert 'liberal' or 'conservative' into it, you are talking about opinion, not fact. Huge difference.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@bass4funk

Whitewater.

Oh, that Republican witch hunt in the 90s that also lasted so long and took up so much time, money, and attention that it led to the end of the Independent Counsel Act, while also proving nothing.

Funding the sales of body parts for Planned Parenthood. But wait there's more.....

This lie again... I like to get into online arguments despite myself, but when you bring up cases that work against you like Whitewater, repeat lies like Planned Parenthood selling baby parts, and link to sites like impeachobamacampaign.com, it becomes tedious and pointless to respond to you.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

In an earlier post on this thread, you copied links to a US Republican site and one called 'impeachobama'.

So that means EVERY and ALL sites that are liberal are valid, accurate? No, they are not, there's always another point of view and sure both sides do spin certain stories to a degree, but the majority of the media does have a vested interested in keeping the balance of power to the liberal side as much as possible, that's not balanced and definetly not fair.

As someone who's worked for both NBC and the Washington Post, do you think those sites are not 'liberal or conservative partisan'?

Depends

And re MSM, do you consider Fox to be 'not liberal or conservative partisan' and not MSM?

Definetly not, since they are really the only network to give both sides air play. CNN to their credit, they've improved a lot, but they still have a long way to go, NBC, nope. That's why nobody watches them.

So yes, there is a difference when you have a network or the general media telling you to shove it because you have conservative views, I know it, I live it every single day.

No and the main reason, they tell both sides of the coin.

Well I'm sure you fault him for trying to stab someone, too.

I still blame the Clinton's on Whitewater, Bill and Lewinsky, the other affairs including Jennifer Flowers and Paula Jones and not wanting to kill OBL. I fault them as well.

Wow, as a prestigious journalist who has worked for the Washington Post and NBC, I would expect you to know that facts are non-partisan

I do and I am, please continue....

and are irrelevant of belief. What you insert 'liberal' or 'conservative' into it, you are talking about opinion, not fact. Huge difference.

Hey, if you think so. Lol. Remember one thing, I'm not on the clock, im not getting paid, therefore as a private citizen, I think I'm free from the confides of journalistic constraints.

Oh, that Republican witch hunt in the 90s that also lasted so long and took up so much time, money, and attention that it led to the end of the Independent Counsel Act, while also proving nothing.

You're dealing with professional lawyers, what do expect, seriously??!

This lie again... I like to get into online arguments despite myself, but when you bring up cases that work against you like Whitewater, repeat lies like Planned Parenthood selling baby parts, and link to sites like impeachobamacampaign.com, it becomes tedious and pointless to respond to you.

lie?? No, not at all. That's ok, I feel the exact same way, Dems and libs never get it, but as long as they have the MSM in their pocket, they do have one ace in they can play, I'll give them that.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

lie?? No, not at all. That's ok, I feel the exact same way, Dems and libs never get it, but as long as they have the MSM in their pocket, they do have one ace in they can play, I'll give them that.

I'd ask for proof, but you'd probably reply with a link to some blogger at plannedparenthoodsellsbabyparts.com.

I assume you're are talking about MSN. I don't trust them either. They might lean left on social issues, but they avoid any reporting that would upset their sponsors or the status quo.

CNN seems to be the most impartial, but at the cost of not asking tough questions. You can watch them and read between the lines for the truth though. Better yet, stick to more independent news sources that report on facts, regardless of how it affects a point of view or political leaning.

Fox News takes the cake in pushing an agenda with flat out lies and deception. By the way, ratings don't mean a thing in regards to accurate reporting. Honey Boo Boo and the Kardashians also pulled in high ratings too. There's a massive captive audience for stupid s***, and they've taped into it. Congratulations.

When you consider that younger people watch less TV and get their news online these days, ratings mean even less. I'm sorry, but if you actually believe Fox is in any way fair and balanced, there really is no talking to you.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I assume you're are talking about MSN.

No, MSM is the new keyword for MainStream Media, used to discredit anything one doesn't agree with by explaining it off as being media agenda.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

^ Gotcha, thanks... (shakes head)

1 ( +2 / -1 )

bass: I think I'm free from the confides of journalistic constraints.

Yeah, I think we got that part. And I'm guessing you meant to say, "confines."

4 ( +5 / -1 )

'I think I'm free from the confides of journalistic constraints.'

'Yeah, I think we got that part. And I'm guessing you meant to say, "confines."

Good job we don't all leave our work skills at the door to that extent. If I did that, I'd be connenting my telly to the gas and wondering why I can't watch the footy and there's a funny smell.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I'd ask for proof, but you'd probably reply with a link to some blogger at plannedparenthoodsellsbabyparts.com.

No, I leave that to liberals. They're better at it.

I assume you're are talking about MSN. I don't trust them either. They might lean left on social issues,

Might? MIGHT? They almost make liberals sound and look center and sane.

but they avoid any reporting that would upset their sponsors or the status quo.

MSNBC never paid attention to the memo, if they did, Sharpton would have been gone a very long time ago.

CNN seems to be the most impartial,

They're trying and they have made a lot of improvements since under new management. One can only hope.

but at the cost of not asking tough questions. You can watch them and read between the lines for the truth though. Better yet, stick to more independent news sources that report on facts, regardless of how it affects a point of view or political leaning.

Oh, yeah? For example?

Fox News takes the cake in pushing an agenda with flat out lies and deception.

Hmmmm.....such as? Interesting, they are the only network with the least amount of retractions, which says a lot. Also, 120 million plus people can't be wrong.

By the way, ratings don't mean a thing in regards to accurate reporting.

Then you really have no clue about how the TV news networks operate.

Honey Boo Boo and the Kardashians also pulled in high ratings too.

Different category, buddy.

There's a massive captive audience for stupid s***, and they've taped into it. Congratulations.

I've never seen either, so I have no opinion about these shows, but from what I heard.....

When you consider that younger people watch less TV and get their news online these days, ratings mean even less.

That's the sad thing and that's why a large portion of the society is absolutely clueless as to what is going on and NOT only in the states. I was in Europe a few weeks ago and they don't fair as well either. The internet socially is becoming the downfall of our young people.

I'm sorry, but if you actually believe Fox is in any way fair and balanced, there really is no talking to you.

I know and I do and if you think so or feel like that, I'm perfectly content with that.

No, MSM is the new keyword for MainStream Media, used to discredit anything one doesn't agree with by explaining it off as being media agenda.

Which it is, has been for a very, very long time.

Yeah, I think we got that part. And I'm guessing you meant to say, "confines."

Exactly. Hey, even I make mistakes, walking and talking ain't easy.

Good job we don't all leave our work skills at the door to that extent.

Oh, darn, I keep forgetting, liberals are the Übermensch and the perfect epitome of the supreme Homo Sapien, incapable and totally infallible of making any mistakes. Excuse me! ROFL

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

There's No Crybaby, Like a GOP/Tea Crybaby, Like No-Bo-dy You Know!

Rump the Great has more than enough to explain for himself. Carson wrote a book, a self promotional, and some facts were dolled up. Big Whoop.

Carson is a religious-nut and Rump is a nut. Neither is qualified for the office.

Thanks GOP-Tea, that whole thing you're doing, pitching you can run a country when you can't run a debate, or campaign, that makes any sense, except to your bought and paid for masters.

These two clowns are such an amusing pair. Carson is wholly absorbed in his religion and Rump is wholly absorbed in himself.

What is clear as crystal? Neither of them care a fig for any American except himself.

Heck, one sold fake medicine (documented) and the other a fake university (documented). Both are one piece of evidence from a felony charge. Of Course; That's about par for the GOP/Shia Tea.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Carson has completely discredited the Politico's attacks on him. Their story that he "admitted" to some nefarious deception has been reduced to quibbling over the correct term to use to define a free education. And CNN has reduced themselves to trying to prove he was actually a nicer guy than he has said he was as a child. As if Carson was not a poor black person growing up in poverty and rose to become the leading neurosurgeon of his day. None of this slime from the Left will be believed by anyone except the hard Left partisans that believe that any American that does not believe religiously in their rigid ideology are the enemy.

So if we are going to fight over trivialities, how about getting Hillary to answer for the tall tale about her harrowing landing in Bosnia under heavy sniper fire that was proven to be false. The press apparently has had no interest in that attempt at heroic aggrandizement.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

LOVED! What The National Review had to say on Carson:

"Carson’s interactions with the company continued until at least March 2014, almost five years after the suit was settled, and a decade after the company’s marketing practices had first begun to come into question."

source: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/396193/ben-carsons-troubling-connection-jim-geraghty

Carson's deceptions continued almost five YEARS! This is the GOP/Tea choice? Another snake-oil Republican. Sure hope he can blame the media for his own moral failings and professional dereliction.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I don't know why I keep doing this, but here we go...

Oh, yeah? For example?

I like the Young Turks. They're proud of their liberal bias, so you'll probably dismiss them. But they criticize the Democrats and Obama almost as much as the Republicans, and they also cover studies and statistics that seem to go against their liberal views. They might do these things begrudgingly, but that's how I know they care about the truth and factual reporting.

They're a little rough and lean toward entertaining news coverage sometimes, but I can always use them as a starting point and read up further online.

Hmmmm.....such as?

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/jan/27/msnbc-fox-cnn-move-needle-our-truth-o-meter-scorec/

The article admits the sample size is far from complete, but the numbers show that Fox News does lie often.

they are the only network with the least amount of retractions

So they double down or move on like their lies don't even matter. How is that a good thing? They also cover their asses by using phrases like "Some say..." before inserting false information when really, they're the only ones saying it. And yes, millions keep watching regardless...

Also, 120 million plus people can't be wrong.

Unless they're liberals, right? Of course millions of people can be wrong. History is full of bad ideas that were massively popular. And Honey Boo Boo.

Then you really have no clue about how the TV news networks operate.

I said ratings don't matter in "regards to accurate reporting." Obviously they matter big time to sponsors and advertisers, and sometimes good journalism is sacrificed because of this on TV news.

The internet socially is becoming the downfall of our young people.

This is a broad argument that is certainly debatable. Concerning information though, the truth is out there amid a lot of nonsense. As long as you have a discerning eye, the Internet is probably still the best source for information though.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I like the Young Turks. They're proud of their liberal bias, so you'll probably dismiss them. But they criticize the Democrats and Obama almost as much as the Republicans, and they also cover studies and statistics that seem to go against their liberal views. They might do these things begrudgingly, but that's how I know they care about the truth and factual reporting. - comments

well said . . .

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The key point is what impact certain 'facts' have over fiction. As for the pyramids....we don't have all the facts. The origin of humans.....we don't have all the facts. Heck we don't even have all the facts from 150 years ago. Let alone thousands!

Mark, Mark they are already finding another tomb behind the one they have established was from King Tut, and how MANY books and egyptian artifacts and documents testify to the pyramids being used as burial chambers are there? What's next for stupid right-wingers to question? This is only a testimony to the USA's failure rate in high school education and republican sheep to call out the hatred and stupiditynof their "leaders".

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What's next for ***** right-wingers to question?

OK, I'll play. So if I were to take the common attack on Carson that although he is one of the foremost neurosurgeon's in the world a man of medicine and science and a Christian - the Left thinks he is a whack job because he has indicated that human history is only 6,000 years old. But you do realize that Hillary Clinton is an avowed Christian don't you? So you are telling me the leading Democrat in America believes that there is some invisible all powerful being floating around in the sky that no one can prove exists and she is not some crazy lunatic? Isn't that the game the Left and the American media are playing against Carson but dare not play on Hillary?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Many Christians are able to separate reality from belief. Many also go to church as a community thing. It's ok to be religious, but it's not ok when the church-goer is not able to separate reality from belief. Do you have some kind of evidence that Hillary is unable to do so?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@smithinjapan,

It is quite clear that double standards exist. It`s very difficult to determine what any politician says is true or not.

Carson is free to think what he wants. Itll be up to the American people to decide if hes a dud or not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Christian - the Left thinks he (Carson) is a whack job because he has indicated that human history is only 6,000 years old.

Just to clarify, "human history is only 6,000 years old" is the definition of 'whack job'.

Hey, Carson can believe and make a good buck selling his "religion" and that's fine.

The real issue? Here's someone who wants to make his religion the basis of law.

Simply, if his personal insight into god's will conflicts with the separation of 'Church and State', Carson wants his god belief to supersede law. That is the definition of a theocracy. The Founding Fathers already covered that subject in the U.S. Constitution.

Carson's candidacy fails on both ignorance and intention.

Carson fails in imagining he is a suitable candidate to Defend and Uphold the Constitution of the United States. His religious prejudice also disqualifies him and his multiple associations with criminal operations is well documented. (See Deceptive Supplements, Real Estate Investment both involving associates' felony charges and convictions. Add: At Liberty University, Carson framed his candidacy as a spiritual battle)

Carson should be offended by Rump the Great not serious examination of his own man in the sky delusions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Strangerland

It's ok to be religious, but it's not ok when the church-goer is not able to separate reality from belief. Do you have some kind of evidence that Hillary is unable to do so?

Yes. She is a Christian and believes in God. Do you have evidence she does not?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites