Ben Carson

[shocka khan]

Whenever the argument is made that Christians are equally as bad as Muslims because Muslims have OBL/ISIS/etc and Christians have Westboro/Pat Roberson/abusive Priests I can only sit back shake my head at the critical thinking skills required to make that pitch to oneself to the degree necessary to allow that thought to leave one's lips. Kahn will be around to explain himself soon, or otherwise realize his folly, because I don't believe he is that far gone, but most of those with a terminal case of liberal retardation will run with that argument until they collapse from trying to support it. Really weird, and textbook irrationalism.

Back on topic: I was afraid that Carson would do something like this. It happens to people that speak for themselves, rather than on behalf of political contributors and the machine. A political outsider will always put his or her foot in their mouth, because they are not a puppet.

And as long as Muslims in this country push for hints of Sharia Law to be implemented, I 100% unapologetically agree with Carson. Carson himself is a little different as he is a Seventh Day Adventist, much like Romney is a Mormon, but I wouldn't have, nor did I have, any issues voting for either one of those guys. That said, the Muslim next door might be a perfectly nice guy in passing and at your cook outs, but at their core that vast majority of Muslims in the world support stuff like 9/11, OBL, and ISIS. That makes them just a little - shall we say - different from other global ethnic or religious groups. You could say it is a red flag, but that may be understating.

Let me sanitize this a bit by protecting the names of people I know.

I have two friends (couples) who are Muslim. Interestingly enough, in both cases, the women run the house and are extremely successful. One worked as an executive for one of the largest insurance companies in the world. She's from Iran. She was a VP and had a 6-figure salary for this company for 25 years. Her employees loved her. She is classy, attractive and sharp. Her husband has his MBA and CPA. He's Turkish. He's smart, but doesn't have the qualities to be the effective leader his wife is.

The wife of the other couple also has an advanced degree and is a director of IT risk management for one of the largest banks in America. She is also a good leader (IMO not quite as good as the first, but damn smart and is a good leader). Her husband changed his name from Tariq to Frank when he got his citizenship, which he was very proud of. I remember him bringing the pictures of his swearing-in ceremony and showing them all of us. They are both Pakistani.

Four people, two very successful by almost any standard. All very smart, I respect all of them. I can't see either of them as president, but I could see where I would vote for a Muslim under the right circumstances.

I have a third friend, he and I watch Shocker games together. He's a life-long Republican from Indiana. His father set up the agricultural banking system in Saudi Arabia. He went to high school in Saudi Arabia. His grandfather on one side was a Baptist minister. I would bet my next two week's check he'd say the same thing.

Perhaps Ben Carson might have misspoke and said he would never vote for or support a muslim running for president. I would also hope that he didn't mean that a Muslim should be prohibited from running for President, as that would be unconstitutional.

At any rate, Ben Carson saying he would never vote for or support a muslim running for president wouldn't be much different from David Duke saying he'd never support or vote for a black candidate for president. That's my opinion.

Unfortunately, Ben Carson really put his foot in his mouth and I agree with others on here that instead of singling people out by identifying characteristics, he probably should have said something more to the effect that he would never vote for anyone who would not support the concept of freedom of religion.

[Play Angry]

Would someone that disagrees with Ben Carson please explain why having a President that is beholden to Sharia Law would make a good fit for the United States of America?

Below is the quote (copy and pasted from a conservative news site):

CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you the question this way: Should a President’s faith matter? Should your faith matter to voters?

DR. BEN CARSON: Well, I guess it depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the constitution, no problem.


CHUCK TODD: So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the constitution?


DR. BEN CARSON: No, I don’t, I do not. … I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.

Neither the question or the reply discuss those beholden to Sharia law. It was an obvious gaffe, and I don't really get why people rush to defend the statement. Defending the speaker as a person, or as a candidate based upon other merits, etc., would make sense to me. But rushing to support and double down on a statement that will obviously be poorly received, when taken verbatim, is confusing. Similar missteps could be made on many different topics and they would be equally damaging- the error in judgment is not just in the content, it is in lacking the emotional intelligence to know how it will be perceived.

It is not something he can't recover from, but he will need to turn on the charisma quickly to counteract this and a "meh" debate performance in close proximity. We'll see if he has it in him I suppose.

[wufan]

Below is the quote (copy and pasted from a conservative news site):



Neither the question or the reply discuss those beholden to Sharia law. It was an obvious gaffe, and I don't really get why people rush to defend the statement. Defending the speaker as a person, or as a candidate based upon other merits, etc., would make sense to me. But rushing to support and double down on a statement that will obviously be poorly received, when taken verbatim, is confusing. Similar missteps could be made on many different topics and they would be equally damaging- the error in judgment is not just in the content, it is in lacking the emotional intelligence to know how it will be perceived.

It is not something he can't recover from, but he will need to turn on the charisma quickly to counteract this and a "meh" debate performance in close proximity. We'll see if he has it in him I suppose.

Perhaps this gaffe will bring Rubio up in the polls.

[SB Shock]

Ben Carson may not have been PC, but he is correct. True practitioners of Islam would never adhere to the U.S. Constitution or civil rights. Islam is not only has a religious aspect, but is a political, social and economic system.

I have Muslim friend who is nice guy. But he sent his kids (who are US citizens) back to Jordan to finish school and be married (they are girls). He told me he they were becoming to ""American".

[Kung Wu]

Neither the question or the reply discuss those beholden to Sharia law.

It doesn't have to.

It was an obvious gaffe, and I don't really get why people rush to defend the statement. Defending the speaker as a person, or as a candidate based upon other merits, etc., would make sense to me. But rushing to support and double down on a statement that will obviously be poorly received, when taken verbatim, is confusing. Similar missteps could be made on many different topics and they would be equally damaging- the error in judgment is not just in the content, it is in lacking the emotional intelligence to know how it will be perceived.

Quite the opposite is happening. Liberal media is rushing to try and pin it as a "gotcha". You call it a gaffe. Is it? I don't see any conservatives, Christians (Democrat or Republican), or Republicans squirming. All I see is leftist media trying to make news of it.

Now explain to us why Ben Carson should advocate a Muslim as the President of the United States.

[Play Angry]

It doesn't have to.

But your question implied that it did. It may have been an unintentional use of a strawman, though.

Quite the opposite is happening. Liberal media is rushing to try and pin it as a "gotcha". You call it a gaffe. Is it? I don't see any conservatives, Christians (Democrat or Republican), or Republicans squirming. All I see is leftist media trying to make news of it.

Now explain to us why Ben Carson should advocate a Muslim as the President of the United States.

I consider myself a conservative, a Christian, and a Republican, and while I may not be "squirming," I think it was a fairly obvious misstep, and that his support will suffer (at least on a short-term basis). Like I said above, when you are running for President, the ability to not make unintentionally-yet-obviously inflammatory statements is a valued skill, both during campaigns and after assuming office. One incident alone is rarely damning, but it can be damaging, and a trend of such statements is almost always fatal to candidacies.

It is not exactly a feeding frenzy exclusive to liberal media here. The Wall Street Journal, Business Insider, CNBC, and plenty of other center to center-right leaning publications, blogs and forums critically discussed and featured the comments. Ted Cruz and other Republican candidates seized on it earlier today.

Regarding your sentence containing the bolded, surely you can see that this wasn't the only alternative way to answer the question? There are a million responses which would have been just fine to all involved - it could have been used as an opportunity to praise how America embraces diverse backgrounds and stories of success, like Carson's own, and that a person of any faith with XYZ values and traits can be worthy of elected office. In the not distant past neither an African American candidate or a Seventh Day Adventist would have been a viable candidate....now things have changed. Use it an inspirational way to broaden the party tent, not exclude an enormous group with many shared policy positions.

Just a few decades ago, many conservative protestants thought "any" catholic candidate was unsupportable because they were ultimately beholden to the Pope and not the Constitution. Most people would find this statement unreasonable now. If, however, it was tweaked to say that "Any Catholic who regards the Pope as the ultimate and absolute authority, above domestic laws and the will of the electorate, on all matters, is unsupportable with regard to running for President," then it would find a much, much broader footing. Although the intent behind the statement may be the same, the ability to convey it in an acceptable way is important once you throw your hat into politics.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming weeks. I am sure Trump, Carson and Fiorina are not the only ones who will enjoy a surge before Iowa.

[Dave Stalwart]

Saw this on Facebook tonight from Ben Carson:

"I wanted to get back to answering questions tonight sent in by you guys. Remember, you can send in your questions via email by sending it to AskBen@Ben:Carson.com.

Before I get started, I wanted to thank the hundreds of thousands of you that sent birthday greetings. I was touched and deeply appreciative.

The first issue I want to deal with tonight is the stories today about my comments yesterday when I was asked if I would support a hypothetical Muslim candidate for President. I responded “I would not advocate for that” and I went on to say that many parts of Sharia Law are not compatible with the Constitution. I was immediately attacked by some of my Republican peers and nearly every Democrat alive. Know this, I meant exactly what I said. I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law.

Those Republicans that take issue with my position are amazing. Under Islamic Law, homosexuals – men and women alike – must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed.

I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced…I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.

…I also can’t advocate supporting Hillary Clinton either by the way.

There were many questions about this and I wanted everyone to know exactly where I stand.

The second question comes tonight from John. John asks “what other talents does Candy have besides violin?”

She is extremely talented. She also plays piano and flute. In fact, she recently recorded a CD that we plan to give to our donors as a thank you gift. Candy also graduated from Yale and earned an MBA from Johns Hopkins. She just finished her new book that comes out in January. Candy is one of those people who can do just about anything.

The last question tonight is from Brenda. Brenda asks if my family tree has been researched.

Actually, I was quite blessed that a Yale classmate of mine, Henry Louis Gates, researched my ancestors on the PBS show "African American Lives" in 2006. My ancestors were slaves brought to the United States from a region along the border of Kenya and Tanzania. They were brought to Georgia. After emancipation, the family, which had been divided by their owners, was reunited. I am very thankful for all of the research that was done by Professor Gates. I assume you can probably find the show on YouTube.

Thank you for reading this tonight. Most of all, thank you for standing with me in this fight to save our great country.

Goodnight,
Ben"

[SB Shock]

You mean he didn't heed CAIR call for him to resign?

[tropicalshox]

I'm a little confused. Did Carsen say the stuff about sharia law during the interview on Sunday? Or did he add that at a later time?

[WuDrWu]

He added it. Many would assume that it's common sense to assume that a Muslim has not renounced Sharia law. If you are one of those that don't assume that, I get that too.

I understand @Play Angry: when he makes his point. It's a fair point. Personally, I'm more about being right than wording exactly right the first time. To me, his point is 100% accurate.

I only wish everyone would listen to the message more than what the media is telling you to listen to and if you're bothered or offended by his comment, or comments like that, I trust you're equally offended by the same comments from candidates who reside on the other side of the aisle and dismiss those candidates with equal fervor.

[SHOCKvalue]

This has not been my experience. I don't go around asking folks (Muslim or otherwise) if they support ISIS, but not my experience that "the vast majority" are evil.

Uh... where do I start.

*I didn't say they were evil, you did. Sympathetic is quite a bit different from evil.

*I don't go around asking them either. That's why my take is based on the results of the national and international polling done on the issue.

*Why would you know? IIRC you are from Augusta, went to college in Wellington, and now live in McPherson for goodness sakes. That's not exactly a recipe for cultural awareness, unless the culture you want to get to know is truck nutz-style white folks. The morning of 9/11 I was in my Political Science gen ed class at WSU. The class had about half a dozen Muslim international students in it. As we were watching the events unfold on the TV in the classroom they were talking amongst themselves and quietly laughing. Their response wouldn't fly today, but that was a crazy day so everyone had their own way to process. It was definitely entertainment of some sort to them. I didn't think they were "evil" people, but based on their response to the event I think it is safe to say they were watching through a different set of lenses.

[tropicalshox]

@SHOCKvalue: please share the polling supporting your claim of a "vast majority of Muslins in the world support stuff like 9/11..." What I've seen is more Muslims support terror acts than I would hope, but it certainly isn't a vast majority.

[SHOCKvalue]

@SHOCKvalue: please share the polling supporting your claim of a "vast majority of Muslins in the world support stuff like 9/11..." What I've seen is more Muslims support terror acts than I would hope, but it certainly isn't a vast majority.

Four months ago Al Jazeera (ran by the royal family of Qatar - not exactly Baghdad) had a poll asking if the respondent supported the actions of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Roughly 50,000 took the poll with around 80% indicating support for ISIS. Al Jazeera has understandably took down the page, but a google search (via web, image, or news search tabs) will give you about all the evidence you could want of its once existence.

Here's another more substantial piece from Pew outlining global Muslim inclinations for Sharia Law:

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/

^There's a ton of data in there, so I'm not going to run with any "vast majority" stuff, but the results are unsettling. How about we just say "majority."

[wu_shizzle]

The quote is easy to defend from a "Ben Carson is not actually a bad guy" context.

The quote is more difficult to defend from a "Ben Carson has the requisite skillset to win a presidential election and deserves your donations, now" context.

I completely agree with this, although Trump is providing all kinds of cover for others to make inarticulate comments.

[tropicalshox]

Four months ago Al Jazeera (ran by the royal family of Qatar - not exactly Baghdad) had a poll asking if the respondent supported the actions of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Roughly 50,000 took the poll with around 80% indicating support for ISIS. Al Jazeera has understandably took down the page, but a google search (via web, image, or news search tabs) will give you about all the evidence you could want of its once existence.

Here's another more substantial piece from Pew outlining global Muslim inclinations for Sharia Law:

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/

^There's a ton of data in there, so I'm not going to run with any "vast majority" stuff, but the results are unsettling. How about we just say "majority."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/10/how-to-measure-what-muslims-really-believe.html

I just found this article from earlier this year which puts it at 12 percent. It's been a while since I looked into this but seems it's somewhat on the low end of polls I saw. But none that I remember were a world wide majority of Muslins supporting terror activities.