DescentBB

.....the folks start finding the lies and fabrications:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBgzzfc

He also believes that the Egyptian Pyramids were built by the Biblical figure Joseph, all to store grain. Even though I'm not an engineer, the way the pyramids were built would be a massive overkill of a project to build for just storing grain. There aren't even any large chambers to store that grain, nor the access.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/natemcdermott/b ... age-not-by

Then there's his claim that he was a violent child, which is also looking like a lie, probably to buff up his normally dead looking, half asleep demeanor.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/05/politics/ ... index.html

The man's craziness is starting to really show.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... not-apply/

tempest in a teapot.

hardly, Lothar, if you start to look at how many things he seems to fabricate.

callmeslick wrote:seems to

key words.

There are lots of good reasons to not vote for Ben Carson. But if you drown those out by discussing bull★■◆●, which this "seems to" be, who is going to listen to your real concerns?

I seem to recall you making a similar argument regarding Hillary and the Benghazi hearings.

Lothar, he would seem to be fabricating an entire resume. Hardly the same as the issue with Hillary at the hearings. I am steering clear of some of outright lunacy Ben Carson espouses, but the pattern of making up life experiences that clearly didn't happen is a bit frightening. And yes, I've seen some of that from Hillary, as well, and find it equally unsettling.

Someone who lies to buff up their image is compensating for something they're missing and they aren't being honest or trustworthy with others doing it. Someone who lies to hide misdeeds or actions is arrogant at best and a crook at worst, and cannot be trusted either. Carson falls into the first category and Hillary the second by being arrogant.

Ben carson can defend what he says all he likes. When west point themselves say they have no record of an application or extending of an application, it makes the entire thing moot.

No way to counter that either. What's Carson going to say, that he was perhaps misplaced in the roster?

he's a slippery one.

Related:

callmeslick wrote:seem to

There's those keywords again.

Politico SEEMS TO be backing off of its statements pretty drastically. They've removed references to "fabrication" and replaced them with "conceded ... never applied". Which is a position perfectly consistent with his story that he was offered the opportunity to attend West Point, but chose to go the M.D. route instead of the military route. Meh.

This is one of the dumbest political stories of the week.

Ferno wrote:Ben carson can defend what he says all he likes. When west point themselves say they have no record of an application or extending of an application, it makes the entire thing moot.

Carson already said he never applied and his book statement verifies that:

"Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point. I didn't refuse the scholarship outright, but I let them know that a military career wasn't where I saw myself going. As overjoyed as I felt to be offered such a scholarship, I wasn't really tempted. The scholarship would have obligated me to spend four years in military service after I finished college. ..."

So try and get your info from someplace other than the liberal press.

And to further what Lothar points out, anyone remember Harry Reid claiming Romney never filed 10 years of tax returns and how the press picked up on that. Same thing going on here. The same people who decry anything bad being said about Hillary, quickly jump on the lie express bandwagon when it is against a conservative. I suggest some of you apply the same rigorous truth seeking as you do in other areas.

wow, Ben just had an utter meltdown on national TV.........not a good thing.

woodchip wrote:So try and get your info from someplace other than the liberal press.

Don't like facts, do ya.

When facts are fabricated...no.

callmeslick wrote:wow, Ben just had an utter meltdown on national TV.........not a good thing.

And what melt down was that.

did you watch his Palm Beach press conference? The man was unhinged and near incoherent at times.

And yet in a poll here in MI, Carson beats Hillary:

"In a head-to-head race between Republican neurosurgeon Carson and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Michiganders would cast 46% of their ballots for Carson over Democrat Clinton’s 40%."

woodchip wrote:And yet in a poll here in MI, Carson beats Hillary:

"In a head-to-head race between Republican neurosurgeon Carson and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Michiganders would cast 46% of their ballots for Carson over Democrat Clinton’s 40%."

proof that Michigan residents are complete idiots. No way that man is competent. On the other hand, it shows the inherent weaknesses of a Clinton candidacy, and why Sanders is a far better choice. Note, by the way, that in the poll, 14% are apparently undecided. My gut says most of them would, by a year from now, realize that Carson is borderline nuts on a lot of issues, and completely uninformed on a host of others. In other words, you are seeing the PEAK right now for him at 46%, which is a number that never wins anything.

woodchip wrote:When facts are fabricated...no.

So now the CBC, globe and mail and BBC fabricate things now, huh?

Keep it up.

and the NYT, Washington Post, etc,etc,etc. Bottom line is that Mr Carson has had a rough few days. The damage may be done, and is largely self-inflicted. Blaming the 'liberal media' is a lame cop-out.

the damage is done, from the political wonk standpoint, when the web is full of this, and far worse:

callmeslick wrote:the damage is done, from the political wonk standpoint, when the web is full of this, and far worse

If you really believed dumbass memes about candidates showed that "the damage is done", you'd have called the campaign over for Hillary, Bernie, Cruz, Trump, basically anyone who's gotten media coverage. I'm pretty sure woody and TB have posted memes mocking both Hillary and Bernie and you've shrugged them off as pointless.

I'd be fine with all of those campaigns being over, but that's just not a realistic expectation. The internet is filled with mockery, and yet none of those campaigns has managed to die yet.

Lothar wrote:If you really believed dumbass memes about candidates showed that "the damage is done", you'd have called the campaign over for Hillary, Bernie, Cruz, Trump, basically anyone who's gotten media coverage.

Not true. There are important differences between the candidates, and one of those is the ability to weather an onslaught of fast-paced negative media. Using only Democratic examples, Mrs. Clinton has been under constant attack (some of it reasonable) for years and is still considered not only electable but likely to be the next president. In contrast, a much smaller mis-step from Mr. Sanders would be devastating to his momentum, all but guaranteeing Mr.s Clinton's party nomination.

That said, I think this issue with Mr. Carson is overblown, but I still don't see him as viable, nor Mr. Trump. I am hoping one of the other Republicans gains some speed before the primaries otherwise this election is going to be over before it starts.

Wow Nightshade. Where were you when Bush was actually trying to take over the whole Middle East at the expense of thousands of our dead young soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi citizens and Dick Cheney had already crowned himself Emperor-in-secret and was responsible for creating internationally illegal torture sites around the world, all in the name of protecting our freedom? Obama hasn't even come close to commiting the crimes or abusing the powers his predecessor did.

vision wrote:There are important differences between the candidates, and one of those is the ability to weather an onslaught of fast-paced negative media

Sure, but "the web is full of this" is a far cry from "an onslaught of fast-paced negative media" pointing toward a campaign in disarray. From what I can tell, the negative media turned neutral-to-slightly-positive pretty quickly as other outlets realized Politico had overreached (and ended up backing off of its claims significantly.) The only people who seem to think it "damaged" Ben Carson are people who already have an incredibly low opinion of him. Most of the feedback I've seen from moderates has been along the lines of "is this seriously what we're talking about now?"

He didn't handle himself super duper awesomely in the press conference (some clips are at http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/06/politics/ ... t-new-day/ ) but it wasn't the sort of way-nutso "meltdown" that would actually take someone out.

(I expect him to drop once the serious wing of the party decides on its candidate -- when they stop splitting votes between Rubio, Bush, Kasich, etc. and just pick one guy.)

"Carson thanks 'biased media' for $3.5M fundraising haul"

we'll see how that translates into votes, woody. Of course,selling books and raising cash for oneself is the primary aim of many GOP candidates. Last time around you had 3 focused more on book sales, and this time is looking to be about the same.

fair critique, I suppose, regarding FB memes, but social media carries FAR more power today than even 5 years ago. However, Carson is in deep crap when this is going out into newspapers(from the Charlotte Observer):

Bloodless self decapitation with a scalpel.

Man is a freakin genius!

more fun in the spotlight. Once Rubio got a bump(at the expense of Bush, and that is significant if you follow political battles), suddenly he has to explain why he was sort of playing fast and loose with a party credit card. Like I said in the title, the spotlight is a tough place.

It's the usual and old Republican whine. It's all the media's fault, not their own. So they get caught in lies, cheating or other transgressions, then blame the media for being biased against them. How about we get some Republicans that don't have skeletons in the closet, lie about their past, lie about their criminal activities or spend their campaign funds like an endless personal slush fund. Saying that, I agree with Republicans that the media really hasn't gone after Hillary in a substantive way. You just KNOW there's a few skeletons in her closet that need to have some harsh light shined upon them.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/state ... -my-money/

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 ... aign-funds

By the way, Republicans can get pretty nasty going after each other too. This race in Louisiana makes Trump's follies look tame.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/joh ... 1d30712419

Also, as far as I know, none of the candidates are proposed to reduce the some senseless spending of taxpayers.

why don't you deal with what you feel is 'senseless spending' by your own country, and let us sort out OUR priorities, Sigma?

callmeslick wrote:why don't you deal with what you feel is 'senseless spending' by your own country, and let us sort out OUR priorities, Sigma?

No one is forcing you to strain your brain to solve these problems.

no one is preventing me from laughing at you speculating on a nation and system you don't grasp at all.

Your laughter is more like a nervous tic.