Ben Carson has got it all wrong.
- Thread starter MOpossum
- Start date
Come on Possum. There is no way you get a lot of responses on posts that are not new news.
If you want to get people to read, you have to post a story when Ben Carson gets something right. THAT will be big news!
I really liked how he tried to frame the argument in response to his comments before they could even be made, and then called them ridiculous for their non existent responses. I can't remember where I have heard that dismissive tactic before.
The original comment is absurd. ISIS tactics are so egregious that they do not belong in a conversation about political conflicts. For him to think in terms oversimplifying the tactics of ISIS like that should scare any conservative who wants to vote for him, unfortunately, he is playing to people who think in very shallow terms. It's as if he is looking for people to vote for him, who have also been patients of his.
I just remembered where I have heard that dismissive tactic before. Conservatives talk radio, where they like to take a position and frame the dissent before it can ever be heard, and then dismiss out of hand as if to control the message, and not allow any rational conservation about a position. A few posters on here like to use the same tactic, yet claim that listen to or watch these same conservative personalities. Makes you wonder.
If you want to get people to read, you have to post a story when Ben Carson gets something right. THAT will be big news!
I really liked how he tried to frame the argument in response to his comments before they could even be made, and then called them ridiculous for their non existent responses. I can't remember where I have heard that dismissive tactic before.
The original comment is absurd. ISIS tactics are so egregious that they do not belong in a conversation about political conflicts. For him to think in terms oversimplifying the tactics of ISIS like that should scare any conservative who wants to vote for him, unfortunately, he is playing to people who think in very shallow terms. It's as if he is looking for people to vote for him, who have also been patients of his.
I just remembered where I have heard that dismissive tactic before. Conservatives talk radio, where they like to take a position and frame the dissent before it can ever be heard, and then dismiss out of hand as if to control the message, and not allow any rational conservation about a position. A few posters on here like to use the same tactic, yet claim that listen to or watch these same conservative personalities. Makes you wonder.
Since there is no link to study, I have no response to your opinion. Provide a link to refference and i'll see.
I think I located what you are referring to????? No link provided. If this is the quote you refer to, what is inaccurate????
"A bunch of rag-tag militiamen defeated the most powerful and professional military force on the planet. Why? Because they believed in what they were doing. They were willing to die for what they believed in," Carson told a luncheon audience of national committee members. "Fast forward to today. What do we have? You've got ISIS. They've got the wrong philosophy, but they're willing to die for it while we are busily giving away every belief and every value for the sake of political correctness. We have to change that."
How can you say ANY of that is inaccurate or wrong?????
First, the American Revolution was about getting out from under tyranny.
Second, the Founding Fathers willingness to die was about altruistic sacrifice. You cannot say the same about ISIS. It's about their martyrdom.
Second, the Founding Fathers willingness to die was about altruistic sacrifice. You cannot say the same about ISIS. It's about their martyrdom.
The real problem is it sounds dumb even if there is an element of truth in what he said. It's the sort of soundbite opponents dream of - cue Ben Carson clip followed by interspersed shots of Islamic terrorists and the Founding Fathers. Close with a line about "do you want a president who thinks ISIS is patriotic?"
This is one of the challenges with neophyte candidates.
This is one of the challenges with neophyte candidates.
Did I say it was smart to say and i'm glad he said it?????
The op said he was wrong! He wasn't.
I know it is not an easy path to the White House. I still prefer people who are candid over those who are "polished and smooth".
Carson didn't cite anyones motives but did say ISIS was wrong. He said both were motivated to the point of giving their lives for what they believed in. If you make an issue out of that statement you just don't care about the truth.
In the political world of 2015, being a candid candidate is an act just as much being smooth and polished.
In the political world of 2015, being a candid candidate is an act just as much being smooth and polished.
It's not suicide when you have no chance anyway. Its about selling your TV show and speeches that come post campaign.
Huckabee already has a show! Is he just trying to increase ratings? I have yet to see Cain and Bachmanns shows.
Why is it so hard for you to believe people want a different direction than exploding debt and deficits, continued moral decay, declining US influence around the world, less personal freedoms, and a return to constitutional governance? Is that person going to be painted as anything but a nut? No. That means they will not likely win but MAY end up as a TV personality as a by product though. I don't think that is the primary goal.
If you think comparing ISIS to those who died in the Revolution is ok, then you are the one with the problem. The people who fought in the revolution were fighting an enemy that knew they were fighting. It's not like the revolutionary fighters were killing anyone they came across. They also didn't kill themselves to kill others.
It is a stupid statement, and the end about us giving away all our beliefs for political correctness, is wrong also.
It is a stupid statement, and the end about us giving away all our beliefs for political correctness, is wrong also.
What experience does Ben Carson have with debt and deficits, besides his own personal finances?
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
I think Huckabee is an actual candidate, not a sideshow.
Bachmann didn't run for a TV show; she ran because she is delusional. I think she is actually crazy, it's not an act with her. I think Cain, Carson, Trump, Cruz, etc. are in on the con a fair % of the time. She doesn't appear to realize it's actually a con, which is what is really scary about her.
I also think she didn't want to leave Congress. I think she left because of the campaign finance stuff - she didn't think she would win re-election.
RE: Cain - he is on the speech circuit making a lot of money. The sexual assault stuff hurt his chances of getting a real show. But:
http://press.foxnews.com/2013/02/fox-news-channel-signs-former-presidential-candidate-herman-cain-to-contributor-role/
What do you think that is??? He's getting paid! He's also got his website out there shilling a bunch of stuff.
Never said he did. Not having any would be a plus though because that would mean he had been responsible with his finances.
He said they were the same in ONE respect and was correct. They both were willing to die for their cause.
So, NO ONE has got a TV show from running but you claim that is the reason they do.
Cain already had a radio show and is far from the only political commentator hired by Fox or any other network. Just because he was hired is far from a trend.
Trump is rich and doesn't need it (and didn't run).
Cruz is a Senator and likely not angling for a show.
Carson was a retired physichian when asked to say a prayer. His prayer put him in the public eye. Quite a sneaky plan he formulated there. Anyone that smart should be qualified to run anything.
Your origional point is baseless.
Herman Cain went from some guy with a radio show that none of us had ever heard of to being a Fox contributor who gets paid five figures+ for a speech. He is EXACTLY what I am talking about.
Donald Trump's stupid comments keep him in the news. There is a reason he's never run for President. It's all about his ego. It's not about being any sort of serious politican.
Cruz is a little different. I think his desired currency is PR, not money. But, he's not doing anything that suggests he has an interest in being a real politician. He's going to use a safe seat in the Senate as a way to get on Fox News 4 times a week. He'd get killed in a national election and the entire establishment of his party would be lining up to oppose him in a primary. He's not running for TV host; he's running for Celebrity Senator with no real political power.
Carson knew EXACTLY what he was doing at the breakfast. That is a nonpartisan event that he turned into a sideshow. He's been riding the wave ever since. He took his chance for 15 minutes of fame. He's the definition of what I'm talking about - a guy who got a soapbox to say some crazy stuff to be famous who'll end up using it to make money.
Donald Trump's stupid comments keep him in the news. There is a reason he's never run for President. It's all about his ego. It's not about being any sort of serious politican.
Cruz is a little different. I think his desired currency is PR, not money. But, he's not doing anything that suggests he has an interest in being a real politician. He's going to use a safe seat in the Senate as a way to get on Fox News 4 times a week. He'd get killed in a national election and the entire establishment of his party would be lining up to oppose him in a primary. He's not running for TV host; he's running for Celebrity Senator with no real political power.
Carson knew EXACTLY what he was doing at the breakfast. That is a nonpartisan event that he turned into a sideshow. He's been riding the wave ever since. He took his chance for 15 minutes of fame. He's the definition of what I'm talking about - a guy who got a soapbox to say some crazy stuff to be famous who'll end up using it to make money.
You could have just said, "No, I don't understand that." Instead you post this and lower everyone's IQ just a little bit.
You think Cain planned that? He was and is loaded. Didn't and doesn't need the money. What were the odds of him ever getting above 3% in the polls. He had a message he thought would resonate....and it did.
Trump is and always has been a publicity hound and barely meets the definition of a Republican let alone conservative.
Cruz is a very conservative politician. He got elected to the Senate by being so. He was nowhere in the polls in Texas and destroyed the favorite because of his views. He also thinks he can do the same in the presidential race.
Carson knew what he was saying....yes. It was not a grand plan to vault himself into national prominence. He said what he believes and it resonated.
Liberals just cant understand the conservative viewpoint and must ascribe ulterior motives because liberals always have ulterior motives.
1. I'm not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination.
2. No, it's that a non-zero percentage of the supposed conservative ideas in America are basically idiotic, and you have be either an idiot, ignorant of facts, or a liar to say them on TV. Think Bobby Jindal talking today about Muslim established "no-go" zones in Europe. He knows nothing of the topic; basically everything he said about it is factually wrong.
People like Michelle Bachmann and Louie Gohmert are idiots who believe the really, really stupid ideas. Sam Brownback is another example of this - he was stupid enough to think his tax plan would actually work.
Plenty of others who are actually smart like the Donald, Rush, and Ted Cruz regularly say things they know are untrue because they know the base gets excited by these stupid comments.
Then there are like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul who avoid the really stupid ones and focus the ones that are defensible. They prove you don't have to say really stupid things all the time to be perceived as "conservative." You don't have to be John McCain to have logical thought.
I am generally supportive of people like Ryan and Paul; I think they add to the political process. I think there are some great Republican governors like Nathan Deal in GA who are working to promote smaller, smarter government. But, man, there's a sizable element of people in the party whose political beliefs are totally brain-dead. And there's a depressingly sizable element of good people in the party who have to pretend to be crazy on a regular basis just to keep getting elected.
It depresses me when someone like Bobby Jindal has to pretend to be an ignoramus because that's what his base rewards. The guy has a bachelors degree in a hard science plus a master's from Oxford. Yet he's out there talking about Muslim no go zones. Jeez.
2. No, it's that a non-zero percentage of the supposed conservative ideas in America are basically idiotic, and you have be either an idiot, ignorant of facts, or a liar to say them on TV. Think Bobby Jindal talking today about Muslim established "no-go" zones in Europe. He knows nothing of the topic; basically everything he said about it is factually wrong.
People like Michelle Bachmann and Louie Gohmert are idiots who believe the really, really stupid ideas. Sam Brownback is another example of this - he was stupid enough to think his tax plan would actually work.
Plenty of others who are actually smart like the Donald, Rush, and Ted Cruz regularly say things they know are untrue because they know the base gets excited by these stupid comments.
Then there are like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul who avoid the really stupid ones and focus the ones that are defensible. They prove you don't have to say really stupid things all the time to be perceived as "conservative." You don't have to be John McCain to have logical thought.
I am generally supportive of people like Ryan and Paul; I think they add to the political process. I think there are some great Republican governors like Nathan Deal in GA who are working to promote smaller, smarter government. But, man, there's a sizable element of people in the party whose political beliefs are totally brain-dead. And there's a depressingly sizable element of good people in the party who have to pretend to be crazy on a regular basis just to keep getting elected.
It depresses me when someone like Bobby Jindal has to pretend to be an ignoramus because that's what his base rewards. The guy has a bachelors degree in a hard science plus a master's from Oxford. Yet he's out there talking about Muslim no go zones. Jeez.
When did I say it wasn't? Why has it? Largely due to sequestration that Obama whines about. Another factor is decreased millitary action that was scheduled before Obama took office.
All I said was some people want an end to increased debt and deficit spending and Carson is an advocate of these among other things.
It's not like there were a couple fat finger letters in the origional post you made. I would have had to make a couple assumptions that I wasn't willing to make. Thanks for clarifying.
So, you aren't a lib but write 3 paragraphs bashing people who hold conservative viewpoints. You then cite the education level of Jindal and claim he's pretending to hold conservative views because he's too smart to actually believe them. It's not possible for an intelligent person to be a conservative seems to be your arguement. You then pronounce the more liberal "conservatives" as the smart ones. I assume that is because they are more in line with your "non liberal" views. You clearly aren't liberal....just like McCain isn't.
You said "exploding debt and deficits" in the post I replied to. The deficit is NOT exploding it's dropping and by a LOT. Republicans have whined about the sequester ever since they let it happen. Especially the military cuts that are in it. I didn't say how or why the deficit is dropping I said it IS.
No, the decline in the budget deficit is not largely due to sequestration.
This is the sort of thing we're talking about in the other thread; it's not thinking outside the box when you don't understand the issue.
The #1 factor driving down the budget deficit is improvement in the health of the economy. Obama tax increases, end of the stimulus, less spend on the wars, and sequestration have all helped that. None of these policy changes are individually responsible for even 1/4 of the change in the budget deficit, though.
The budget deficit has been more closed by a change in revenue than a change in spending.
No, I don't bash people for being conservative; I bash people for being idiots.
There's nothing wrong with wanting a smaller government. There's nothing wrong with advocating for lower taxes. There are many good arguments for these items. And, fundamentally, these are opinions; I don't think there is a magic level of taxes/spending/whatever that is "right."
But, there are answers that are pretty clearly not right. And way too many of these are given serious currency on the right. They tend to be repeated by the same people. We're talking things like:
- The Laffer curve
- The gold standard
- The idea that lower corporate tax rates will magically help the middle class (this is an extremely inefficient way to help the middle class)
- The idea that science is a lie
- The Balanced Budget Amendment
- The idea that unemployment during or right after a recession is due to people not trying to find jobs because unemployment is generous
- More guns saves lies
- Obama is a foreign Muslim
- The free market is perfect for everything (we can't have laws about X, Y, Z because they go against the free market!)
- The IRS is the worst thing ever
- The lack of acknowledgement that defense spending is easily as screwed up as any other type of spending
- The US should have focused on getting to a balanced budget during the worst recession in years
The left, in 2015, does not have nearly this amount of outright stupid/false ideas gaining major currency among its base. It has some (overemphasis on taxing the rich is one of them), but these aren't being pushed as the platform of the party.
There are a number of very good conservative ideas and principles, things like:
- The government can't just fix everything with money or attention; the government has to honestly account for the result of your actions, including unintended side effects
- Regulations are sticky, and we should do a better job thinking about how to avoid regulatory overload over time
- The tax code is way too complicated
- The free market works very well at seeking profit and it should be allowed to do so in most cases
- Certain parts of the government are pretty inefficient and could spend money better
- Entitlements need to be reformed to be sustainable over the long term
Republicans should focus on those sorts of items and not the stupid items from above. When I see Paul Ryan on TV, he's usually focused on the second list of items. When I see Louie Gohmert, he's talking about the first list almost exclusively.
Would you feel better if I said exploding debt? The deficit is much larger than just 10 yrs ago.
You listed 5 things. I had named 2 of them. It wasn't an all encompasing list.
The economy is better but not by much.
Tax increases always generate income at first.
The stimulus is far from over.
The economy was so slow that revenue was horrible. The economy couldn't stay that bad as it had over blown things. It has had an impact on the deficit but it wouldn't have had much impact if the wars hadn'y wound down and sequestration hadn't forced spending reductions in the growth rate.
Similar threads
